User talk:JWKNYC

Richard Benjamin Harrison

Hi. Where in the source that you cited is it indicated that any the Harrisons mentioned therein include or do not include those featured on Pawn Stars? Can you quote or point to a specific passage? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 00:37, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for initiating a Talk. I apologize that my first entry was not clear. I can understand the confusion. The entire lineage of the Pawn Stars Harrison family is not at WorldFamilies.net. The primary purpose of the WorldFamilies project is for comparing Y-DNA test results, not for providing the details of a family tree. Under Lineage 3 at WorldFamilies.net, you can find the following descendant line:

          1. Joseph HARRISON (c1740-?), married Anne BAWLS
               2. Joseph HARRISON (1768-1860), married Drucilla BENTLEY (1772-1865)
                    3. Benjamin HARRISON (1796-1866), married Fanny PRICE (c1797-?)
                         4. Reuben Bentley HARRISON (1825-?), married Martha Ann ROBERTS (1825-?)

Just do a page search for "Reuben Bentley" and you'll find him (there's only one).

Rubin Bentley Harrison (born 1825) is Richard "The Old Man" Harrison's great-great-grandfather. The research is very solid. Again, WorldFamily.net is not meant to provide the historical documentation (census, birth records, etc). That research is found elsewhere (which I gave plenty of links) -- WorldFamily.net is only for providing Y-DNA results.

Where on that page is it indicated that Rubin Bentley Harrison is Richard "The Old Man" Harrison's great-great-grandfather? Nightscream (talk) 10:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Nightscream, did you read what I wrote? I explicitly stated above that the Pawn Stars Harrison family (which includes "The Old Man") is not at WorldFamilies.net. The WorldFamily.net reference is to provide the Y-DNA evidence that the Harrison presidents are not related to Rubin Bentley Harrison (born 1825). I gave 35 other references to establish that Rubin Bentley Harrison is Richard "The Old Man" Harrison's great-great-grandfather.JWKNYC (talk) 17:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I read everything that you wrote. And I'm asking you where in those references does it indicate that Reuben Bentley Harrison is Richard Harrison's great-great-grandfather. Nightscream (talk) 18:20, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Nightscream, you specifically asked "where on that page" (see above). You did not asked about other references. I can only answer what you asked.

You will have to go through the other references to establish each relationship in the lineage. For example, in August 2012 Smjwalsh added a reference to the obituary of Ruth Harrison (1910-1993) to establish that she was the mother of "The Old Man." I added a reference to the obituary of Richard Harrison Sr. (1908-2000) which establishes both that "The Old Man" is the son "Richard Harrison Sr (1908-2000) and that he is the grandson of William Calvin Harrison (1973-1935) and Josephine Samantha Frank (1879-1958).

What I added was no different in principle than what Smjwalsh added in August 2012. If you do not have a problem with what Smjwalsh added, then you should not have a problem with what I added. It's the same principle; you just need to go through the references.

JWKNYC (talk) 19:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Nightscream, you specifically asked "where on that page"... I specifically asked you where in the source you cited was it indicated that any the Harrisons mentioned therein include or do not include those featured on Pawn Stars. It was you who cited that source for the statement "Based on the Y-DNA test results published under The Harrison DNA Project, the Harrison family lineage which includes the Pawn Stars family is not related to the Harrison family lineage which includes the two Harrison presidents." Therefore, with all due respect, the obligation is on you--not I--to point to where in those citations this is indicated. All I did was to ask you if you could do this. That's all. Simple question. And yet, your response is to essentially say, "Go look in them yourself". Whether the statement is establish in one source or one of the many others you cited, the basic point was, I was asking you were it was established that the subject of the article was clearly referenced in those sources. Now you're splitting hairs over which of them I was specifying. Indeed, which one was the one in which the connection was established was kinda the point of my inquiry.

If you are unwilling to be straightforward in responding to this, then I am forced to conclude that your edits are what they initially appeared to be: The drawing of a conclusion, based on a source, that is not explicitly or clearly given in that source. This is synthesis, which is a form of original research, and is not permitted on Wikipedia. If Smjwalsh's edits gave you the false impression that this was permitted, well, I wouldn't blame you for this, since your edits were made in good faith, but his edits violate the same policies, so I have removed the material he added as well. I thank you for pointing that out to me. I don't always catch everything when it comes into an article.

Moreover, using public records such as birth certificates, census records, etc. to establish personal info in biographical articles is not permitted by WP:BLPPRIMARY.

Lastly, in terms of good article writing and due weight afforded to appropriate information, it is not justifiable to create an entire section, filled with references to genealogical records, obits, birth certificates, etc., just to respond to what was a couple of throwaway lines by the two cast members in regards to their ancestry, when that is hardly what they are notable for.

If you disagree with this, we can start a discussion on the article's talk page, and invite other editors in the community to weigh in.

Either way, I thank you for your time. I hope we can collaborate in the future. :-) Nightscream (talk) 19:46, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Can we please keep this civil and productive? You asked "where on that page?" after I said it was not on that page. I tried to answer your questions in a straigtforward manner. It's all in writing.

Here are my opinions: Your point on original research is valid. Your point on synthesis is not likely valid. Your point on BLP is not valid.

BLP:

I do not agree that this is a misuse of primary sources. No public records were used to "support assertions about a living person." The only living person mentioned is Richard "The Old Man" Harrison." He is not listed in any publically available census or birth records. The most recent available census records is 1940; and he was born in 1941. The fact that he is the son and grandson of Richard, Sr. and William Calvin, respectfully, was in an obituary, which is not a public document as implied by Misuse of primary sources. It is a news item published by the family. This is no different in principle than including "The Old Man's" birth date because it was published on vegasnews.com. Should "The Old Man's" birth date also be deleted from this article?

Synthesis:

I am not convinced there was synthesis. If one source says Person A is the son of Person B, and another source says person B is the son of Person C; I don't believe it is synthesis to claim that Person A is the grandson of Person C -- it is the definition of grandson. It's like claiming Paris is the capital of France. Please see the wiki example about the United Nations and war.

Original Research:

I agree that, as presented, my edit could be called original research. As a scientist, I have a hard time thinking of looking up a record in a database as being research. This does not seem much different than sticking to the sources: "Research that consists of collecting and organizing material from existing sources within the provisions of this and other content policies is fundamental to writing an encyclopedia." That is explicitly statement that research is required for contributing to wikipedia.

However, many other people have also done this "research." You can find the ancestral lineage from "The Old Man's" father to Joseph Harrison (b. c1740) on ancestry.com. You can also find some of their lineage on findagrave.com. Do you believe citing the research of others to be consistent with wikipedia's policies?

JWKNYC (talk) 23:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)