Jump to content

Talk:Vivian Cash

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notability

[edit]

The article gives no indication of her notability independently of Cash. All the sources deal with her relationship with Cash. In my view, that means that a freestanding article about her should not exist, per WP:N, and that any content here should be merged into the article on Johnny Cash. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Clearly this was a headline news a few times, so you are not correct. The many edits here also confirm this. Also her children are headline news. She is an author. The page was stater in 2019‎ and you are the 1st to ask this question? Johnny Cash page is already long. I could go on. So no.Telecine Guy (talk) 16:54, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But, to be fair, it was a question I asked almost two years ago, the article has been developed, and I haven't pursued it since then... so.... ? Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:03, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sydney Trent Washington Post Article

[edit]

“ Shields married a White man — albeit illegally — and by the time Jim Crow arrived in the 1930s all of her children and their descendants were listed as White.”

The aforementioned article has numerous errors that conflict with the findings of Dr. Henry Louis Gates in the finding your roots episode. The marriage between Sarah Shields and Andrew Robinson was completely legal and verified by the Perry County Alabama recorder. Furthermore the assertion that Sarah Shields was “an enslaved Black woman” is also a lie because nowhere in the south would a marriage have been legalized between a white and a woman who was Black in phenotype. Dr. Gates mentions this in the episode and a photo of Sarah Shields on ancestry family search shows she was clearly very mixed race. The article is part of a WaPo series that’s more of a kitschy look at nostalgia rather than being wholly factual and historical in nature aka “Jim Crow took ahold in the 1930s” which is historically false. The article appears to push a “One drop” bias. With the topic of Vivian this has to be avoided at all costs because the bias has been so strong and there’s been so much misinformation and gossip. I motion that the Sydney Trent article never be cited in this article as it’s completely bogus and poorly sourced. MickTravisBickle (talk) 22:03, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

‎ :@MickTravisBickle: Hello and welcome to Wikipedia, we are glad you’re here. Just a note that your reverts were generally unconstructive and did not fall within Wikipedia guidelines, which is ok, we were all new editors at one point and this is a learning process. Here are a couple helpful links to some Wikipedia policies to get you started:

Here at Wikipedia we need sources to back every claim that is made regarding the article. In addition, we do not remove other editors WP:GF reliably sourced contributions on an article until a Consensus has been reached on the talk page as that can be considered disruptive and possibly lead to edit wars. As for the Washington post, we have a very useful source for consensus regarding source reliability among editors, it is located right here[1] as you can see at WP:WAPO, the Washington post is considered a very reliable source, any claims of it or one of its articles being unreliable or biased needs to be taken to the Wikipedia reliable sources noticeboard[2], otherwise we already have extensive editor consensus that the Washington post is reliable. What you did now is called Original Research, it means you are changing an article based on your own original research and synthesis and not what the sources say which is unfortunately strictly prohibited by Wikipedia. Everything in the article must be sourced reliably and you need to avoid synthesis, that means jumping to your own conclusions based on what a source says. Such as Henry Louis Gates Jr., you jumped to your own conclusions based on what he said but your conclusions aren’t explicitly stated therefore they cannot be used. I hope this clears up how Wikipedia works and I look forward to working with you in the future. Cheers! TagaworShah (talk) 20:36, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


I’m not doing original research I’m going by with Henry Louis Gates is. So you’re telling me you’re going to contradict Dr. Henry Louis Gates? You are very in familiar with the subject matter being extremely controversial and there’s a lot of misinformation around it and to spin a One Drop narrative which you appear to be doing is bias and historically unsound. MickTravisBickle (talk) 22:03, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


When are you leaving Clickbait country thanng in? And I’m sorry you can’t go against Dr. Henry Louis Gates. Country Thang is saying that Vivian “wasn’t Italian” and that she was “lying about her ancestry” may I ask if that’s how you feel? Because I have to be honest with you the edits you made and the sites that you are going back to are all right wing “one drop of black blood makes you black” websites. Gates was actual collegiate research done by a top genealogists and DNA. So what are you saying it’s Sydney Trent’s words against his? WOW. MickTravisBickle (talk) 22:03, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MickTravisBickle: Your conclusions are unfortunately not supported by Henry Louis Gates Jr. explicitly, they come from your own WP:SYNTHESIS of what he has to say which is unfortunately original research. “Stated on Finding my roots” is a WP:PRIMARY source, we need secondary sources like the Washington post to interpret them for us since we are just editors. Claims of bias must’ve sourced and be careful not to accuse your fellow editors of trying to push a false narrative or being biased, we here Assume Good Faith in one another. If you have any reliable sources that say contrary, show them here, if not i’m sorry but we can’t rule out the Washington post. TagaworShah (talk) 20:48, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Why are Continually citing country Thang daily? May I ask? Country Thang is at a racist Clickbait website they’ve lied and said that Vivian cash was “lying about being Italian” verbatim they literally say that she wasn’t Italian. I am really distressed because I feel like you’re pushing a racist one drop narrative when the whole point of her racial narrative is that she wasn’t black or even mixed African-American I guess that’s what we’re doing now it’s relevant because 200 years ago she had one black ancestor? Wow... MickTravisBickle (talk) 22:03, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MickTravisBickle: Do you have a source that CTD is unreliable or racist? Here we go by what the sources say, not our own personal opinions. Let’s avoid the accusations that anyone is pushing a narrative as that can be considered a personal attack, we are all here to better the article :). To begin with, do you have any sources that would rule out what is said by the Washington Post, Fox News, The African American registry, and CTD? If so please provide them here so we can give them due weight, if not, i’m sorry but we simply cannot remove reliably sourced information based on original research. TagaworShah (talk) 20:56, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, census records are also considered primary sources and should not be used. The word very remote doesn’t belong here, it is not stated by any of the sources, all the sources give the same weight as her other ancestry. Again remember we cannot publish original research. Cheers! TagaworShah (talk) 21:05, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


“ She is African American, not Italian American When the country hitmaker was arrested in 1965 for his drug case, a newspaper released a photo of him with his then-spouse Vivian. Along with the photo comes the publicized less-known fact that she was of African American descent instead of Italian American.”

That above IS A LIE. Do you want her so badly to be one dropped that you’re posting something false via quoting a click bait website? Country thang on that article if you scroll down and saying that she is an African-American and has no Italian roots! That is a lie and you are publishing and therefore backing those lies. I know how Wikipedia works and then we need to bring any outside individual because this will continue to be a conflict. I’m not going to stand for false racial history via the one drop targeted against an innocent woman who suffered enough in her lifetime. MickTravisBickle (talk) 13:03, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MickTravisBickle: Nowhere in the Wikipedia article is the CTD article used to say she is not Italian American, you have to actually point out in the article what statement that CTD is using to support is unreliable and give proof. There is ample mention of Vivian being Italian in the article. In addition, let’s avoid Personal attacks as I have already warned you about this once. Clearly you have very strong opinions about the One Drop Rule but Wikipedia is not a place for opinions or advocacy, it is a place for facts and the facts aren’t always pretty. I would say consider starting a blog about Vivian instead, as we can only publish stuff that is reliably sourced here. TagaworShah (talk) 21:23, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So census and birth records are not reliable sources but country thang website is? 

MickTravisBickle (talk) 13:43, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MickTravisBickle: Census records are primary sources, check out WP:PRIMARY, we as editors cannot evaluate primary sources ourselves. As for CTD, you haven’t actually provided what statement in this article that it is being used to support is unreliable, so I don’t see the problem here. TagaworShah (talk) 21:53, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Liberto

[edit]

Her father was an amateur magician I don’t know why you keep changing it to musician. I am really concerned that you have not done enough research on this and you’re simply referencing click bait website to click bait website. There are those of us who been studying her reading about her and ownthe documentary which I strongly suggest that you watch because it has photographic evidence that her father was a magician not a musician. Thank you. MickTravisBickle (talk) 13:03, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MickTravisBickle: The washington post article literally says “ the daughter of Thomas Liberto, owner of an insurance agency and an amateur musician, and Irene Robinson Liberto, a homemaker.” Here we go by what reliable secondary sources say not based on photographs as that is also a Primary source and not reliable. Comment on edits not on the editors, argument of authority on your part don’t hold weight here, we are all equal. Thank you. TagaworShah (talk) 22:22, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I want to dispute the neutrality of this article can you call in another advisory please. Referencing an article where the author is citing incorrect history. Jim Crow did not “start the 1930s” it started at the end of the 19th century. There are photographs of Vivian working as a magicians assistant which you claim will not verify my reference material. You are not willing to acknowledge that this article already came with a lot of baggage because of how much misunderstanding was surrounding her clearly stated racial identity and her family history. Her racial identity was clearly stated by her. She said I am white. I am Italian. I am Sicilian . There’s no controversy around a racial identity because it’s clear there is controversy around her ancestry. So I dispute the neutrality of you editing and sources . MickTravisBickle (talk) 14:53, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MickTravisBickle: Per WP:WAPO there is a consensus among editors that the Washington Post is reliable, but feel free to take this to the Reliable sources noticeboard [3]; A consensus there is the only way you can negate the Washington post as a valid source. Every source is biased, a source can be reliable and biased at the same time. Racial identity is much more complex than what a person says they are, let’s stick to what the sources say. TagaworShah (talk) 23:38, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Vivian’s biography goes into detail about how he was an amateur magician and was in the magicians brotherhood‘s etc. That should be enough to prove to you how many false hoods are in the WaPo article in the falsehoods got spread to that country thang article that I can’t believe you’re referencing. But this is very important to you so I will go through all the channels to make sure this bundle of lies masquerading as a Washington post article is not going to ruin the neutrality and the balance of this piece. You also shouldn’t be telling me I can’t remove cited material “without consensus” because you did that to my work yourself. What I can see so far about you that’s very disturbing is that you don’t respect Vivian‘s own agency and her own words over her own life but instead you’re looking at the gossip mongers that came 60 years later. It’s like you’re trying to go reassign somebody’s gender on hearsay. And to tell me that racial identity is more complex and “not just have somebody identifies”? What is that about? I’m a Black multi racial person. MickTravisBickle (talk) 17:03, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
From Vivian’s memoirs. Please use better sources next time because this is an article that is very controversial and it’s already coming with a lot of baggage. https://twitter.com/sabasouljournal/status/1459331310674055168?s=21 MickTravisBickle (talk) 17:26, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MickTravisBickle: Read Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks, this is the third and final time I will give you this warning. You should not be commenting on the editor, only on the edits. You need consensus to remove reliably SOURCED information from the article, your claims weren’t properly sourced, that’s how wikipedia works, any claims that are not verifiable get deleted. TagaworShah (talk) 01:29, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you do know it is possible to be both a musician and a magician right? Wikipedia policy is clear that unsourced material should be deleted immediately without discussion, the burden of proof was on you to prove he was in fact a magician. TagaworShah (talk) 01:40, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
He wasn’t also a musician.
And I proved it. My reference is NOT unsourced. That’s her memoir and is not unsourced. There is no reference anywhere to “ musician” but Sydney Trents article which you have quoted couple times that has mentioned that Tom Liberto was a “musician“ he was not a musician. It’s OK to admit that that article has mistakes in it. That’s how we can professional edit the truth online  ? MickTravisBickle (talk) 17:26, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MickTravisBickle: You just now provided a source for that statement and that is why I haven’t reverted it. The burden of proof is on you for the inclusion of contentious material. If you believe the Washington post article made a small mistake there, feel free to email them so they can post a correction, however, that doesn’t make the whole article unreliable, the Washington post has a long history of reliability and Sydney Trent is a well respected and Award-winning journalists, but still feel free to take it to the WP:RSN. TagaworShah (talk) 01:56, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. So despite someone being an award-winning journalist we all know from people like Norman Mailer and others they are also fallible. I guess if you look at the bigger picture if there’s numerous mistakes in that article and they get disseminated into other articles like country thang as they have, than the original source material is in question. Is there a forum I can go on Wikipedia to have the article judged by other editors outside of this article? I think it’s a serious enough misstep. Or just simply being published in the Washington post make everything a journalist writes de facto truth on Wikipedia?
I read the article again tonight and counted 9 mistakes and what could be construed as a journalistic attempt to make Vivian’s ancestry look less remote Aka “enslaved Black woman.” Those mistakes which in my opinion veer into bold faced lies, go against Vivian’s own memoir, two of Johnny Cash‘s autobiographies, the documentary my Darling Vivian and the finding your roots episode with Dr. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. which unearthed the near two centuries old ancestor in the first place. That’s pretty formidable company to be going up against with a controversial subject matter like this. I mean understand where you are working with a set of rules where the TV show can’t be referenced ad infinitum but at the same time we wouldn’t have the information that gave birth to all these articles (many of which are in my opinion questionable) without that TV show. So you’re saying that people are free to use their journalistic status to interpret the show but not quote Dr. Gates’ research with any validity?
Probably could best be resolved by uploading a photograph of Sarah Sheilds which is in the public domain as well as a print out of Rosanne Cash’s DNA test which showed almost zero Black ancestry aka 3% with 1% coming from Johnny Cash. So remote is accurate even trebling the results. She actually had more Asian ancestry than Black. MickTravisBickle (talk) 18:26, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MickTravisBickle: You could request a third opinion through WP:THIRD but it looks like your main problem is with the Washington post source reliability which in that case should be taken to WP:RSN. I don’t see any reason to believe that all the sources such as CTD, Fox News, and the AA registry got their information from the Washington Post article. Again photographs or commercial DNA results aren’t reliable sources and cannot be used in the article, please read WP:RS, and if you choose to use Finding Your Roots as a source, please look at my most recent edit on how to properly cite it, you must show where you got the information, simply saying it was stated there is not enough. TagaworShah (talk) 03:11, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve removed the finding your roots information. It’s as you wrote on cited so it doesn’t need to be there. My issue is not with the Washington post that’s with that one particular article and the veracity of her research, her clear one drop bias and the bad faith interpretation of what Gates found on finding your roots. I see a journalist making almost a dozen blatant mistakes that’s a red flag for me as a researcher and historian.
I’m not sure why more photographs can’t be added to the article? I see no rules that conflict. The controversy -extreme controversy- is solely about her physical appearance. The overwhelming Caucasian ancestry and overwhelming Italian Sicilian narrative, Irish narrative, German immigrant grandparent and literal Fine tooth comb genealogy isn’t enough to quell the “one drop of black blood” bias controversy and the overwhelming need to falsely reclassify Vivian’s race today- Oddly similar to what the KKK did. Photographs flesh out the details. Remember the entire reason this controversy exists in the first place is because of one single photograph which the KKK distorted and when not distorted still bears little resemblance to her. Had that photographic not existed you and I would not being having this conversation because this is all about phenotype. From start to finish. I think if we add more photographs with simple non-opinionated captions that would add to the article greatly. MickTravisBickle (talk) 19:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MickTravisBickle: Again photographs are not reliable sources and they cannot be used to prove anything or make a point. Plus most of these photos aren’t even allowed here as they break copyright concerns, the photo in the infobox says it’s your own work but it’s clearly just a zoomed in version of a paparazzi picture? All photos on the Wikipedia commons need to be free of copyright concerns. WP:RSN is still the correct place to go even if you only have an issue with a single article of the Washington post, that is where consensus can be reached on if the article is appropriate to be used here. As for your other claims, they are clearly personal attacks and don’t belong on this encyclopedia and i’m not going to even try to respond. This is not the forum for you to express your dismay about the one drop rule, the facts aren’t always going to be pretty, let’s keep this professional and stick to ONLY discussing the edits. TagaworShah (talk) 04:08, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So you wholly misinterpreted what I wrote. I know from many many years ago reading Wikipedia editing talk pages that when you have these very controversial subjects people need to keep an open mind. And the subject matter here is very very controversial because the verified facts are not acceptable. That’s not a personal attack that’s empiricism. That’s reading article after article after article that is fixated on one ancestor and ignoring her ancestry were claiming that she was lying about it or it never existed . I have researched her for life 20 years. Photos of Sarah Sheilds are in the public domain. They’re almost 200 years old. I don’t understand why a picture of her and Andrew Robinson can’t be published if it’s public domain? Not to “prove a point” because Wikipedia articles have photos in them, correct ? MickTravisBickle (talk) 20:16, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MickTravisBickle: Comparing including sourced information about Vivians ethnicity to being akin to the KKK is very much a personal attack. You do realize even the African American registry says she was a Black woman right? And spare me the arguments of authority, I could also so easily claim that I am a Harvard Historian that has worked closely with her family since the 60s, we are all equal here, only the sources hold weight. A photograph of Vivians ancestor from the 1800s is not relevant whatsoever, this is an article about Vivian not Sarah Shields, it’s clear you only want to include the photo to make a point. If the sources fixate on her Black ancestors than that means it is notable in her story, here we go by what the sources say not our own personal opinion. TagaworShah (talk) 04:44, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well interesting because I just looked at the African-American registry and it’s a random nonprofit falsely calling her a “Black woman.” Anyone could create a non profit and call anyone they want any race they choose. And not surprisingly It’s only sources are those two country music website with the false information about her race. For a self purported nationally recognized group I’m shocked at such poor source material. George Zimmerman is a Black man with a recent Afro Peruvian grandfather but I found he was not included as Black. So that registry appears to be a cherry pick. A random nonprofit for Italian Americans could call her Italian just like the registry are falsely calling her a “Black woman” only with her nearly all European narrative that she identified with it would be the truth. Actually I do believe there is a national Italian registry that is similar so I will find that reference which should coexist with the “African-American registry.”
Again you misread me. I didn’t compare source material however dubious I may find it to what the KKK did I said the overriding backlash against her *clearly stated narrative and identity* and how it’s being re-written falsely over the one drop I see elsewhere is sadly similar KKK did. “Let’s trace bloodlines she’s lying“ compared to 2021 with “they traced her bloodlines and found 1/64” For me when I read those articles it reminds me of the Nuremberg laws for Jewish people. I don’t blame people for believing them because they’re widely disseminated. If we really want to make this article a great article editors have to be aware that there’s a lot of bias out there.
Regarding the photograph of her black ancestor are you telling me I can’t? I plan to upload it to the commons and include it. If they’re fixated on the ancestry as you say then it’s a perfect fit because that’s her black ancestor. There is absolutely no reason why I cannot post a picture of Sarah shields she’s completely relevant to this entire piece. Please allow me to keep improving this piece. Thank you MickTravisBickle (talk) 22:16, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MickTravisBickle: THE African American registry is not some random nonprofit, there is even a special citation template on Wikipedia just for the AA registry. I don’t know why you are bringing up George Zimmerman as that is completely irrelevant. This article is a team effort, not all of your contributions are bettering the article and you need to recognize that, including some random picture of one of her ancestors to the article just to make a point in not an improvement. Again the first step I recommend taking is going to the WP:RSN about the Washington post article, without consensus that it is unreliable, it will be used. TagaworShah (talk) 07:25, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Zimmerman is a Black man with much, much more recent Black ancestry than Vivian but he’s only mentioned as Hispanic so not irrelevant. The registry is a nonprofit that is getting funding and tax exempt status to (in part) register African-American history and people of African descent and that includes the African Diaspora and Black South Americans. George Zimmerman and his Afro Peruvian mother been excluded. Again veracity of alleged unbiased sources is important. Thus if the “African American Registry” is viable than any established nonprofit can be cited. Italian brotherhood and the Sons of Italy will definitely be can included in the article as the Liberto family has an extensive history within San Antonio, Texas.
Also I’m not following why you would tell me that “EVEN the African-American registry believes she’s a black woman.” Does that now mean because they recently added her that suddenly she’s not a white Italian American anymore? Can you please clarify?
Sarah Sheilds is not a random ancestor! I’m not sure why that point is unacceptable as that is her mixed race ancestor and the person on her family tree that was the “smoking gun“ that Sydney Trent and others keep mentioning as the “enslaved black woman” ? There should be a photo of her. I see ancestry photos on other public figures pages. Why not Vivian? Anyway there’s no reason for an editing conflict if I put a photo up. I did enough research on the rules and it’s very relevant. MickTravisBickle (talk) 07:02, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Identify Vs Ancestry

[edit]

The claims that controversy ensued around Vivian’s “racial identity read as leading and disingenuous as they are fully with no proof. Her racial identity is clearly stated BY HER and her biographer Ann Sharpensteen as White Sicilian/Italian. The term “racial ancestry” is less nebulous. The editor claims above “Racial identity is much more complex than what a person says they are, let’s stick to what the sources say” which is questionable response to this editing conflict as no sources with verified genealogy disprove Vivian’s clearly stated white racial identity. Perhaps a compromise could be reached with “controversy ensued around her racial self identity” ?

She had 1/64 Black ancestry according to a recently published University paper which meticulously traced her ancestors. I am assuming given the sources chosen by more experienced editors eg: country music now and country thang daily are considered historical research over a published University paper? I couldn’t figure that out via the Wikipedia rules. The research is meticulous and actually doesn’t mention Gates special. It would be a big help in adding more information for Wikipedia users. MickTravisBickle (talk) 06:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MickTravisBickle: Except that per literally all the sources the debate has always been about her racial identity not her ancestry. Her ancestry is something very new that just got discovered by Henry Louis Gates Jr., her racial identity is something that was debated all her life and to this day and that’s what the sources say. It doesn’t matter what she said she was, I could say I’m white too, that doesn’t change how people perceive me, race is about perception and if the sources say that one of the main reasons for her notability is that her racial identity was in question that’s what we write. Feel free to add any university papers about her ancestry in the appropriate section but that’s not really why she was notable. TagaworShah (talk) 15:08, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We are in conflict on this. The sources don’t all debate her identity! You’ve put your own spin on this. And you’re also incorrect that the ancestry-her genealogy has been well known for years because it’s all public record. Other people delved into it long before Gates did formally so again that’s also incorrect. The citation of the politician from New Zealand that’s been challenging her identity mentions what I just wrote in his piece. Also you’re in a completely bad faith position when you say “that’s not how people perceive me” because how do I know how people perceive you and how do you know how people perceive her? Other than the incident with the KKK that she was not hounded for her race during her entire life nor was it ever really a question until blogs try to spin the narrative. And as you said blogs are not relevant. So we are in conflict on this and I want to revert because you don’t have any citations for it only your unverified personal opinion that Vivian “wasn’t white.” MickTravisBickle (talk) 06:16, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MickTravisBickle: It’s not my opinion it’s what the sources say, Washington post, Fox News, AA registry, CTD, HISTORY, they all mention her racial identity coming into question as the main reason she is notable, I don’t need citations for a statement in the lede that is supported by a whole section in the body. Your entire argument rests upon your own Original Research, you cannot change the well sourced addition that her racial identity has came into question, without WP:CONSENSUS. TagaworShah (talk) 15:23, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect. You cited three sources with verifiably bogus history in them. You stated that even though their are falsehoods that doesn’t render the rest of the source acceptable and sound. I can post 10 sources that say she’s all Sicilian white just as you’re posting sources that claim she’s a Black woman. While I’ve been balanced and showed both sides of her ancestry you were clearly leaning towards a bias where she will be racially reclassified as a black person regardless of her other ancestors. You stated no sources that respect her true verified ancestral narrative. Not her opinion of herself but her verified narrative. She was an Italian white woman. Can you ask a third editor to step in please? Thank you. MickTravisBickle (talk) 07:30, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MickTravisBickle: Can you please stop edit warring the lede? I have told you multiple times that is not an improvement and does not belong on Wikipedia. Here we focus on what the RELIABLE sources say, I will be requesting a third opinion because it’s clear you have a blatant disregard for Wikipedia guidelines and are just trying to make a point. TagaworShah (talk) 15:43, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am just as much valid here is you. And I feel it is a vast improvement. You are using sources that are very suspect. You have no reliable sources to cite the lead you just have your personal opinion of how you feel the sources interpret her physical appearances. You are citing sources that say she’s not Italian American! They are lying and spinning a false narrative. I’m not trying to prove a point I’m trying to make this article better. I don’t feel there’s really been controversy around it as much as speculation. And I originally put controversy and I remove because I don’t think it really fits. I think if you look at blogs and Twitter yes but when it comes to the actual source is your siding people seem that it’s speculative not controversial. MickTravisBickle (talk) 07:30, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MickTravisBickle: Read MOS:ETHNICITY mentions o her being white or italian don’t belong in the lede of an article and are certainly not relevant. Again, the lede is not a place to introduce information but to summarize what is in the body, my claim is supported by over 5 reliable sources. Wait until the third opinion. TagaworShah (talk) 15:50, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You’re sources are circumspect as they give out false information. I am just as much valid here is you. And I feel it is a vast improvement. You are using sources that are very suspect. You have no reliable sources to cite the lead you just have your personal opinion of how you *feel* the sources interpret her physical appearances. You are citing sources that say she’s not Italian American! They are lying and spinning a false narrative. I’m not trying to prove a point. I don’t feel there’s really been controversy around it as much as speculation. And I originally put controversy and I removed it because I don’t think it really fits. I think if you look at blogs and Twitter yes but when it comes to the actual sources even the articles with the falsehoods in them that you keep citing -it’s more speculative as opposed to controversial. MickTravisBickle (talk) 07:30, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WP:REHASH You just said the exact same thing over again. I have already responded to all of those claims. I have requested a third opinion, please wait until you edit the article further. TagaworShah (talk) 15:56, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
MickTravisBickle Please stop changing the lede while we are in an active dispute based on your own original research. “She was forgotten after the KKK incident” says who? all of this is based on your own personal research, all the sources talk about the controversy surrounding her racial identity occurring after her marriage not after her death by “blogs” that is entirely your original research and does not belong in the lede or body. TagaworShah (talk) 16:04, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All the sources do not. Some do. Mainly the false sources with false lies like Country Thang. She was not a Black woman. MickTravisBickle (talk) 08:44 14 November 2021 (UTC)

@MickTravisBickle: Please WP:INDENT your replies. Without that, it makes the discussion impossible to follow for a third-party. — curiousGolden call me maybe? 17:14, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


TagaworShah Cited Sources Concerns

[edit]

TagaworShah is using multiple source references that are verifiably false and potentially suspect. Two of the sources are country music websites eg “Country Thang” a blog style entertainment radio station website which falsely has said “Vivian Cash was not Italian American she was African-American” and other lies. He feels that even though there’s a falsehood that glaring that still makes the source material worthy and trustworthy. The country thang has spun a narrative that’s false

TagowarShah cites as a source the African American registry who *very* recently added Vivian Cash. Their SOLE source of citated history and research for Vivian Cash is the same two Country music sites with the false history TagaworShah is using.

TagaworShah then stated, “Remember even the African-American register views Vivian as a Black woman” as if that’s supposed verify credible given the circular false narrative being spun.

TagowarShah claims because only some of their information is false the rest is reliable yet readers will click on the reference material and potentially be lead to false information. TagowarShah even admits that the statement by the country music website is false yet he reminds us of the “African-American registry” and their belief of it is as a valid source.

TagaworShah also extensively uses the Washington post article written by Sydney Trent. Again there’s well over a half a dozen verified false statements in the article The most glaring being that she claims that one of Vivian‘s second great grandmother Sarah Shields was an “enslaved Black woman” when she was second generation mixed race and that Sarah’s was with her white husband “illegally” when the marriage was fully verified by the county recorder. Numerous other parts of the article contradict the findings of Henry Louis Gates, Jr. despite the fact that he is quoted and pictured in the article. TagaworShah has also removed my citations/ material which TagaworShah requested I not do of his work. MickTravisBickle (talk) 09:22 14 November 2021 (UTC)

African American Registry does not qualify as a Reliable Source, per WIki MOS, because it is user-generated, like IMDb and Wikipedia itself. I, too, was surprised to follow the cite to AAR, and to read there that Vivian Cash was described as "a black homemaker". That's absurd to classify her now as black. She did not grow up in Black culture or identify as Black. The fact that she had some African-American ancestry does not make her Black in culture or identity. Today we do not accept that identity is imposed only by others.

An interesting aspect of this discussion is that the Gates show "Finding Your Roots" also found DNA indicating some African ancestry for Johnny Cash's family. But AAR does not classify him as black, nor are they classifying Roseanne Cash and her siblings as black. If Vivian Cash was black, so are they as her daughters. But it's a mis-application of the one-drop rule. A poorly sourced article in AAR does not define consensus for establishing Vivian Cash Distin's ethnicity. Parkwells (talk) 20:07, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

3O - Identity, genetics, and coverage in reliable and unreliable sources

[edit]

There are three points of possible interest. One is her genetics; she had a distant documented ancestor of recent African origin but much of her ancestry was from Sicily. Her social identity was White American and nobody who called themselves Black American ever identified her as black. And various racists publicly applied the one-drop rule to her to label her as, in some sense, black; to the extent that I understand the US racial hatred system of her lifetime, this would have been an attempt to devalue her and her husband, spoil his commercial success, and incite violence against them.

Can either of you draft a possible text / changes to the current article, referenced to reliable sources, that presents these points and avoids endorsing, or presenting in Wikipedia's voice, any of the unpleasant and scientifically-illiterate racial essentialism that was directed at them? Hunc (talk) 13:56, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It may help to say that the only obvious problem in the current version, and it is minor, is the reference to a statement on a TV show. While it's acceptable in this context to refer to a spoken direct statement of a simple fact from a distinguished commentator who has a reputation for accuracy, WP:RS does suggest that a more academic publication would be better. We are unlikely to find anything of the sort given her limited notability, and the current version seems entirely acceptable. The various claims made on her identity by identitarian sites do not appear to be worthy of mention here. I hope this helps. Hunc (talk) 10:08, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hunc: Hello and my apologies for taking so long to respond. Our main points of contention come from 3 statements which are in the current version that MickTravisBickle does not agree with. I have tried to remove as much of the “stated on finding my roots” citations as possible as that is not a reliable source for most information except one area where it’s just a statement of fact about a census record by a trusted historian about Vivians Great Grandfather. The first point of contention is:

Following her marriage, she became known for the controversy that ensued surrounding her racial identity.

Sources:

  • "Why Hate Groups Went After Johnny Cash in the 1960s". History. Retrieved November 17, 2021.
  • Sydney Trent (May 16, 2021). Sally Buzbee (ed.). "White supremacists attacked Johnny Cash for marrying a 'Negro' woman. But was his first wife Black?". The Washington Post. Ann Arbor. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved November 9, 2021.
  • Nate Day (May 17, 2021). "Johnny Cash's first wife had Black heritage, DNA test proves". Fox News. Retrieved November 9, 2021.

This is what I had originally wrote and the present version was changed without consensus. I included this in the lede because outside of her being Johnny Cash’s wife the only other thing really making her notable is the controversy that ensued following her marriage with Johnny Cash about her race. Micktravisbickle took it as being in reference to the modern speculations surrounding her race by people like Nándor Tánczos and various websites calling her Black, which can be mentioned in the article although I was referring to the racist attacks against her and her husband for her presumed racial identity during her lifetime as all the sources the talk about her outside of just being Cash’s wife talk about. Micktravisbickle also wanted to put “white” or “Italian-American” in front of racial identity which is not how the sources present the problem and isn’t with accordance to MOS:ETHNICITY as even though she is Italian that’s not what she is notable for. We already mention her Italian upbringing and stated white acial identity in the body of the article.

The second point of contention is this phrase:

“Her mother was of Irish, German, and African American descent.”

Sources:

Micktravisbickle opposes the inclusion of African American in that statement, as apparently a university paper which I have still yet to have seen any proof of its existence has claimed she has only 1/64 Black ancestry so it was too far back to include. I don’t see any rules for blood quantum in the descent category as long as reliable sources say she had maternal African American descent and her mother’s Grandfather, Lafayette Robinson, was legally considered an African American by the US Census per Henry Louis Gates Jr.

The third and final point of contention is the Washington post article itself. I told Micktravisbickle that he should go to the WP:RSN for that since consensus agrees per WP:WAPO that the Washington post is a reliable source, however, he insisted because of a minor error, mistaking magician for musician, that the whole article is unreliable and cannot be used in the article and wants an opinion from a third party. Besides that everything else is fine for now, I had to clean up a lot of the neutrality issues in the article but the current version is decent as long as we resolve these three points. Thank you for your time! TagaworShah (talk) 07:17, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: and with the Washington post article, Micktravisbickle specifically objects to calling Vivians Maternal Great-Grandmother an Enslaved Black women which is stated in the WAPO article and saying her, Sarah Shields, marriage was illegal as the WAPO article does. TagaworShah (talk) 07:30, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


First and foremost thank you for your balanced input. Vivian Cash was not black or multi racial. She was Sicilian American with a mother who was Irish and German. Having another “Black American“ say she was Black is not a good barometer for establishing a correct ancestral narrative though no one notable Black has. TagaworShah doesn’t not seem to want to acknowledge the empirical fact that there’s a lot of misinformation around Vivian’s racial identity thus the sources have to be the most well researched and verified. That’s why the country thing Clickbait article is so dangerous because it’s already infected a credible source of reference about black America a.k.a. the African-American registry. The Country Thang daily article (which actually is not a real new site it’s a Facebook page that decided to create a website to get web traffic), needs to be banned from this article: https://twitter.com/sabasouljournal/status/1461816417251172359?s=21 Even the discussion they claim to create around the Catholic Church is incorrect. In fact there are over a dozen falsehoods and bad inflammatory rhetoric in the Country Thang article. I could spend 20 minutes pointing out every mistake with references from Johnny Cash biographies etc. It’s a tragedy that that is the article that the African-American registry has referenced to mistakenly claim Vivian was “Black.” I have contacted them to try correct the error(s). Sydney Trents article in the Washington post should also be stricken. I already corrected a mistake about Vivian‘s father‘s occupation which TagaworShah fought against me on even after I provided verified proof and the fact that the author herself is a poor researcher e.g: “when Jim Crow took a hold in the 1930s.” Vivian‘s mother was enslaved mixed race woman who was freed by her father Willam Shields. Her nameless enslaved mother was also mixed race. The Sheilds family specifically bred with their mixed race slaves and then encouraged their children to only marry white. That’s unlike many mixed race descendants of slaves who were multi generationally mixed. Getting into percentages goes into pseudoscience and the “one drop” which we must avoid in this article. Since TagaworShah refuses to use Henry Louis Gates then you cannot say she was an enslaved “black woman“ that denotes monoracialism. Rosanne Cash’s is DNA test pulled up virtually no black ancestry but since you don’t want that referenced either The best source of reference is a paper published on Bartleby called “The Shields Family: A Dichotomy of Race by Joseph C. Platte. He goes all the way back to almost the 18th century. His main source of contention (despite the fact that is very balanced) is that that one line of Vivian’s 32 Great great great grandparents only bore /had children with white people. Moreover Sheilds paying for his daughter Sarah shields to wed Andrew Robinson in Perry County Alabama by paying off the County recorder also points to the reliabilit—y of Sydney Trent’s poorly researched article in the Washington Post as she says it “was albeit illegally and bought their passage into whiteness.” Again TagaworShah claims we can’t reference Henry Louis Gates yet Sydney Trent’s article which he feels has complete veracity is framed around that episode though she gets the information completely wrong. I move that both the country thing article and the Sydney Trent article be banned from Vivian‘s page forthwith. MickTravisBickle (talk) 14:22 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Sources

[edit]

Hunc disagrees with allowing statements from Gates's Finding Your Roots, but he has a staff of researchers, historians and DNA analysts and, a "reputation for accuracy". He is himself a published author and historian. The staff gathers and analyzes such primary sources as census records, bills of sale, court and deed records, and marriage and birth records. Hunc seems to accept a cite from History.com, which also has a television show. I think Finding Your Roots is a secondary source like History.Parkwells (talk) 21:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Editors have accepted the FOX News coverage of the finding that Roseanne Cash (and her mother Vivian, by extension) has African DNA from her mother's side, which has also been supported by documentation in one line. What's odd is that FOX News did not also publicize the African DNA on Johnny Cash's side of the family, which was covered by Gates in the same show. The staff had not found written records, but the DNA is there. Other historians have documented that many interracial unions took place among working class people (indentured servants and enslaved people) in the colonial period, as documented by Paul Heinegg and Henry Louis Gates in other sources.Parkwells (talk) 21:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Vivian Cash Distin

[edit]

While on the one hand there is discussion in the TAlk page saying that a person is not considered notable solely based on marriage to a notable person (per Wiki MOS). But in Vivian Cash's case, there would have been no controversy or discussion about her racial classification except that she was married to the very public notable figure of Johnny Cash. He was known for his music and in 1965 also having just gotten arrested for drug possession. A couple of years later he aroused controversy because of criticism about his behavior and connections to counter-cultural figures, which spilled over to her. Parkwells (talk) 21:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction in Genealogy section

[edit]

As far as i can tell, two consecutive sentences contradict each other; which is correct? Gates also found wedding registry records for Sarah and her white husband, Andrew Robinson, who had married legally and openly during the Civil War in Perry County, Alabama, with Sarah's father paying the county recorder to register the wedding. Ten years later Sarah and her siblings were freed by their father through an act of legislature in Alabama in March of 1848. The wedding took place during the Civil War (1861-65), yet the manumission took place "[t]en years later" in 1848 ~ or 15 years earlier, as we do time in this dimension. What is the actual chronology of these events? Happy days, ~ LindsayHello 20:59, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see this has been resolved/corrected. Thank you, Parkwells. Happy days, ~ LindsayHello 18:32, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vivian_Cash&oldid=1233020309"