Talk:Taney Arrest Warrant

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

"Disputed" Template[edit]

I didn't add this template because I think the article is written badly or misrepresents the facts, but to give readers a warning that this topic is the subject of much conjecture and uncertainty. If there's a better template to put that idea across, I would encourage someone to use it instead of "Disputed." Docmcconl (talk) 00:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you just add some sourced text describing the dispute? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 00:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since you don't actually dispute any of the facts in the article, I don't think the Disputed template is appropriate. That the reality of the warrant is controversial is clearly stated in the article. Therefore I propose removing the Disputed template, and will do so unless there is objection. Tms (talk) 21:08, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion because of lack of verifiability[edit]

The article has been noted as unsourced since 2007 and it is almost 2011. This article hasn't sufficient reliable sources that an average person can check and fails WP:VERIFY and [[[WP:RS]]. --Javaweb (talk) 23:17, 19 December 2010 (UTC)Javaweb[reply]

I added two recent scholarly books from 2008 and 2009 that cover the case, and also deleted un-sourced material that is not referenced by any popular or scholarly source. Rjensen (talk) 01:18, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the references. The reference from Harvard press looks good. "Shattering the Truth: The Slandering of Abraham Lincoln" Author Dennis W. Brandt Publisher Booksurge Llc, 2009 ISBN 9781439229323

I'm considering deleting the reference because: 1. It's not easily found in libraries. worldcat.org, the metacatalog of libraries shows none having this book. 2. It was self-published via Booksurge 3. Amazon shows it as rarely purchased: ~873,900 books sold more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Javaweb (talkcontribs) 03:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted Brandt as a source because it is not reliable. This appears to be a self-published book by an author without any credentials on the matter. ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by DLTielhard (talkcontribs) 04:28, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New sources[edit]

With the new sources I just added I think theee is little doubt that this is a well sourced claim even a probable one now that we have 3 sources Kalmenb (talk) 05:22, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]