19:2419:24, 14 November 2022diffhist−31
Robert Widenmann
Undid revision 1121562070 by
Tajotep (
talk) There isn't a shred of evidence this photo is Widenmann (it comes from an antique store in Oregon). There are actual photos of Widenmann so not sure why this one keeps being used.Tag: Undo
14:5814:58, 12 July 2022diffhist−41
Dave Rudabaugh
Undid revision 1097727237 by
Aithus (
talk) This is a photo of an unidentified man found in an antique store--it is only identified as Rudabaugh online because the owner thinks it matches descriptions of Rudabaugh so he's posted it with that ID.Tag: Undo
22 April 2022
22:1922:19, 22 April 2022diffhist−436
Lucien Maxwell
The US government did not seize the land (and the lawyer, Springer, wasn't even in New Mexico when the land was sold); Maxwell sold the land for $1,350,000.
13:4713:47, 27 July 2021diffhist−53
Robert Widenmann
Undid revision 1035618535 by
Mohamed mfuu (
talk) I'm posting a link where you can see the owner trying to push this photo as Widenmann; he admits it came from an antique store with no identifying marks--it's not Widenmann.Tag: Undo
14:4214:42, 24 July 2021diffhist−31
Robert Widenmann
Removing photo that is most definitely not Widenmann. It was found in an antique store with no identifying marks or known history. The owner of the photo posts it online because he thinks it looks like Widenmann.
18:4918:49, 29 June 2017diffhist+5
m
Jesse Wayne Brazel
A paper misreported the date as July 9th. https://donaanacounty.org/content/historical-pat-garrett-document-found-will-be-unveiled-june-16
23:1523:15, 17 February 2017diffhist−188
Kate Warne
The photograph is not of Kate Warne, it is John Babcock in the photo. This is according to the labeling on the original photograph (and other photos of Babcock confirm this)
19:2419:24, 14 November 2022diffhist−31
Robert Widenmann
Undid revision 1121562070 by
Tajotep (
talk) There isn't a shred of evidence this photo is Widenmann (it comes from an antique store in Oregon). There are actual photos of Widenmann so not sure why this one keeps being used.Tag: Undo
14:5814:58, 12 July 2022diffhist−41
Dave Rudabaugh
Undid revision 1097727237 by
Aithus (
talk) This is a photo of an unidentified man found in an antique store--it is only identified as Rudabaugh online because the owner thinks it matches descriptions of Rudabaugh so he's posted it with that ID.Tag: Undo
22 April 2022
22:1922:19, 22 April 2022diffhist−436
Lucien Maxwell
The US government did not seize the land (and the lawyer, Springer, wasn't even in New Mexico when the land was sold); Maxwell sold the land for $1,350,000.
13:4713:47, 27 July 2021diffhist−53
Robert Widenmann
Undid revision 1035618535 by
Mohamed mfuu (
talk) I'm posting a link where you can see the owner trying to push this photo as Widenmann; he admits it came from an antique store with no identifying marks--it's not Widenmann.Tag: Undo
14:4214:42, 24 July 2021diffhist−31
Robert Widenmann
Removing photo that is most definitely not Widenmann. It was found in an antique store with no identifying marks or known history. The owner of the photo posts it online because he thinks it looks like Widenmann.
18:4918:49, 29 June 2017diffhist+5
m
Jesse Wayne Brazel
A paper misreported the date as July 9th. https://donaanacounty.org/content/historical-pat-garrett-document-found-will-be-unveiled-june-16
23:1523:15, 17 February 2017diffhist−188
Kate Warne
The photograph is not of Kate Warne, it is John Babcock in the photo. This is according to the labeling on the original photograph (and other photos of Babcock confirm this)