Misplaced Pages

Talk:Leo Frank: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:16, 11 January 2016 view source64.134.43.18 (talk) Undid vandalism by Doug Weller (talk) Please explain how this supposedly "insults Jews"← Previous edit Revision as of 20:42, 11 January 2016 view source 64.134.43.18 (talk) Opening ParagraphNext edit →
Line 90: Line 90:


So yeah, I agree... "Stay classy, Misplaced Pages". ] (]) 19:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC) So yeah, I agree... "Stay classy, Misplaced Pages". ] (]) 19:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

:Relevant to the above comment: The fact that this comment was almost immediately deleted as an "attack" on jews only serves to prove the point. ] (]) 20:42, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:42, 11 January 2016

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Leo Frank article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
Good articleLeo Frank has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 14, 2004Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 12, 2014Peer reviewReviewed
May 30, 2015Good article nomineeNot listed
October 14, 2015Good article nomineeListed
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 17, 2007, August 17, 2008, August 17, 2011, and August 17, 2015.
Current status: Good article
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconBiography
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconGeorgia (U.S. state): Atlanta Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (U.S. state)Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state)
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Atlanta task force (assessed as Low-importance).
Atlanta task force To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconCrime and Criminal Biography High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconJewish history
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:Findnotice

Miscellaneous comments

The article doesn't mention the Pinkertons or Burns. I think this might be worth adding to the Police investigation section. I don't see this mention in the latest GA review, so I'm not sure why it isn't there. It seems worthy enough of at least a sentence or two.

We don't say that Frank initially claimed he didn't know Phagan, but tried to implicate Gantt based on accusations of a prior relationship. The article does mention "a late Monday meeting called by Frank in which he tried to implicate Gantt”. But perhaps we can expand on this.

The blood stains found on Conley's shirt turned out to be rust. We mention that the police looked for blood and found none, but we could mention this as well.

Minola McKnight also isn't mentioned in the article. Supposedly, she claimed to be "tortured" at the police station, claimed Frank said he wanted to kill himself, and admitted the murder to Lucille.


There were also a few things that were originally brought up by a GBH sock, but still merit attention.

The lead says about Conley: He gave statements to the police that he was an accomplice after the fact, for which he would be found guilty and sentenced in 1914, and was the prosecution's main witness against Frank in the murder trial. Conley wasn't found guilty, but plead guilty. Perhaps this could just say he was sentenced, and leave out "found guilty ".

Another quote from the lead on the murder notes: There were two notes next to Phagan, which appeared to be written by her, implicating the night watchman Newt Lee. If "at first" is added to make it "which at first appeared...", it might be a bit clearer that they appeared to be written by her at first, but then it became apparent that they were instead written by Conley. Tonystewart14 (talk) 06:05, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Removed images

There were several images removed from the article during the GA, mainly due to copyright reasons. These images are probably not actually copyright, but we didn't have time to confirm whether they met the criteria of being in the public domain (i.e., published before 1923). The three main ones deleted from Commons were Luther Rosser, Hugh Dorsey, and William Smith. There were others removed, including Frank sitting at trial, Tom Watson, Adolph Ochs, and Fiddlin' John Carson. It might have been that some in this latter group were removed simply for not being notable enough to include a picture, not for copyright reasons, but I want to make sure for each so we add them back in if we can ascertain their copyright status. Tonystewart14 (talk) 06:19, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Opening Paragraph

Last sentence: "The consensus of researchers on the subject is that Frank was wrongly convicted." Check upper right, yup it's locked. Stay classy, wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.251.7.21 (talk) 15:25, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Look at the third paragraph of "After the trial". Also, it is locked due to persistent vandalism in the past. Tonystewart14 (talk) 18:06, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

It's what is commonly referred to as a "False Consensus", User 73.251.7.21. Note the rationale: Claims of vandalism. Apparently, one man's vandalism is another man's NPOV, but one would never know that without delving into the archives here.

If you review the talk page archives, you will find that the actual vandalizing of this article has been done by Frank's proponents, in order to keep most of the evidence of Frank's guilt out of the article so he may continue to be falsely presented as a victim of "antisemitism". Also, many editors who have sought a neutral point of view for the article have had their contributions reverted, their arguments hidden or deleted from the talk page, and even been blocked or banned over trumped up charges of sockpuppetry or other supposed offenses in order to maintain the false consensus that Frank's proponents fought so hard to achieve.

Take note that those who push the idea that Frank was "innocent" are primarily jewish. This is why most of the source references given in the article are works of jewish authors. Any source that does not promote the "innocence" of Frank, especially those of non-jewish authors or historians which promote the idea that he was guilty are routinely removed and dismissed with the "antisemitic" smear. Tom Watson, the famous, well respected lawyer, author, and statesman, who was a contemporary of Frank, and wrote and published the most definitive series of articles on Mary Phagan's murder and the trial of Leo Frank is the most notable example.

So yeah, I agree... "Stay classy, Misplaced Pages". 64.134.43.18 (talk) 19:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Relevant to the above comment: The fact that this comment was almost immediately deleted as an "attack" on jews only serves to prove the point. 64.134.43.18 (talk) 20:42, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Categories: