This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
This article has been added to List of terrorist incidents. However, I would not classify it as terrorism since it appears to be an isolated act of personal revenge, with no organization or ideology behind it. Mirror Vax 16:58, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
I am still making some revisions on the text as research materials come in so I have only done inline notes for the very top section. I will complete the inline parts right before it's ready to submit for peer review. If you have any items that would ordinarly be translated into inline materials, please use bracketed http links in the text and I will translate into inline notes as the article matures. Jtmichcock 02:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm not clear from the closing section of the article as to whether there still is a school at Bath. It sounds like the replacement building opened in 1928 was named after the senator as an "agricultural school", and that this replaced the damaged school, then notes that this ag school building was demolished in 1975. Did something get built to replace it, or is there no longer a school in Bath? GBC 17:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
The school that was blown up was actually rebuilt and used. I graduated from Bath in 1974, and that old brick building was used for the middle school until, I believe, around that time until a new high school was completed and then it was torn down. The "old" high school was then converted to the middle school. I recall that building very well. 209.244.187.142 13:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes i am currently in 10th grade at bath and the middle school still stand, just across the street is memorial park. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.84.189.85 ( talk) 00:25, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
"Unlike the Columbine High School massacre, there was no legislative response, either by the state or federal governments, aimed at preventing a recurrence, although pyrotol was quietly taken off the market."
Taken off the market by whom? The article Pyrotol states that sales were halted after the Bath school disaster. It leaves one hanging. Was it a spontaneous and unanimous decision by all the manufacturers and/or distributors, or what? Herostratus 18:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
One of the better Featured Articles I've ever read. Remarkably consistent, smoothly- and coherently-written, focused, crisp, and informative. Great job! - Silence 21:22, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
This is an excellent article. Very well done. I just have one problem to note: the links within the article which refer to the endnotes do not match. If one clicks on note 25 in the article (the reference to the KKK blaming the crime on Keogh's Roman Catholicism), you go to reference # 27 at the bottom. This should be fixed. -- Charles 04:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
This probably doesn't belong in the article, but I wanted to put it where people could find it. From The Autobiography of W. N. Ferris ( Woodbridge N. Ferris, an educator, was a former Michigan Governor and current U.S. Senator at the time of the disaster.)
A very good article, I like all the pictures. Kevin
Suspect this page has been vandalised - states the event took place in April 2007, and other dates seem to have been changed too. Afraid I'm not knowledgeable enough on the subject to amend. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.2.61.248 ( talk) 17:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC).
This is a featured article, so I'm reluctant to change it, but shouldn't the statement that it's the dealiest act of "mass murder" be changed to bombing? The mass murder article uses Columbine as an example, which would put this in the same league as VA Tech. Primeromundo 02:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Looks like this article referenced the disaster as the "deadliest" school-related killing in US history until yesterday, when the Va. Tech tragedy happened. Still, as the article on that event notes, there was a greater death toll here than in Blacksburg (45>33). As such, I am 99% sure this should be changed back to what it was before yesterday's edit storm, but since I am far from an expert on US school massacres, I wanted to make sure there wasn't some third, historically notable event of which I am not aware that would explain this. Editor Emeritus 12:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm unclear as to why the two links under "see also" are there. What would be more appropriate would be links to lists of mass murders, school shootings, or anti-government actions by individuals. The two links here could almost be chosen at random.-- Velvet elvis81 16:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I removed
So that the giant white space wasn't there anymore, now I don't see a place where to put it? §tepshep • ¡Talk to me! 00:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Dear fellow contributors
MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether or not dates are autoformatted. MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this.
There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:
Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. I'm seeking feedback about this proposal to remove it from the main text (using a script) in about a week's time on a trial basis. The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. BTW, anyone has the right to object, and my aim is not to argue against people on the issue. Tony (talk) 12:33, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Is "disaster" really the right word? It implies that it was an accident. Maybe "attacks" or "massacre" or something would be a better word. - Branddobbe ( talk) 11:15, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
From Final 2 victims of 1927 bombing to get tombstones: "A grant from a foundation will pay for their grave markers and a ceremony to place them will be held Nov. 11 at Pleasant Hill Cemetery in Bath."
On or after Nov. 11 this article should be updated to reflect this new information. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 19:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
The end-note system breaks the numbering when two {{ref|...}}'s are the same with a different one in between. Using standard <ref>...</ref> syntax with {{reflist}} works. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 04:19, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Re: this edit and its immediate predecessor:
There is a disagreement over whether "Ironically" fits. While true, using the word ironically is editorializing and the tone is not encyclopedic. For this reason, I favor removing it. WhisperToMe ( talk · contribs) removed it, SouthernNights ( talk · contribs) restored it a few days later.
Does anyone else have any comments on this? davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:03, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
But there was no shooting. He shot no one, and the rifle itself was no more a weapon the the detonation caps, it was just used to set off another explosion. He didn't need it since he set off the first bombing without it, it was just expedient. I feel that putting it as a shooting is misleading at best since that's not an accurate description of what happened, and that if we put the rifle as a weapon we should also include all the ingredients of the explosives since it's only consistent if we mention every single thing that went into making the final outcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.243.20.72 ( talk) 09:50, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
2nd paragraph, is Perry and Percy the same person?
Just thought it might be a mistake. Sorry if I wasted time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DAaaMan64 ( talk • contribs) 09:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was not moved. All arguments grounded on what would be a more accurate description by a plain language interpretation of the title have been discounted as irrelevant. When there is no title for something chosen by the world as its name, then (and only then) do we try to come up with a neutral and accurately descriptive title. When the world has chosen a name, shown here by the predominance of this title in search results, with an eye toward which focus on reliable sources, which a Google books search does far more than a web search (always go to Google books and news archive before Google web), then our own judgment of the title's neutrality and accuracy has no place. As evidenced below, the common name appears to be the current title, including over bombing from the book search, the only other contender. The suggested title isn't even in the running.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 12:22, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Bath School disaster → Bath School massacre —
STRONGLY OPPOSE changing the name of this article. Just because the National Inquirer demands more and more sensational headlines does not mean that wikipedia has to follow suit. Shortly after this calamity occurred a book called the Bath School Disaster was published. That is where the name came from. It is not just descriptive, there is an actual history to the name. When we start letting google name our articles we are ( opinion) in deep dodo. Carptrash ( talk) 04:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
No contest, as far as I'm concerned. But for kicks, let's check Google Books produces as measure of what published sources say rather than bloggers and miscellaneous web sites.
Again no contest. older ≠ wiser 17:07, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I apologize for my ill chosen words and images in my last posting. It was not my intention to offend. However I believe that looking at what we (wikipedia) have to say about disasters will reveal that the word is appropriate in this context. I have emailed the Bath School Board to try and learn how this event is referred to there. About 20 years ago I visited Bath (where I picked up my copy of the book mentioned previously) and discussed the bombing with some locales who assured me that the injured total was much higher than is typically reported. This horror was much more than mass murder, though that was a terrible part of it. "Bombing"? Well, okay but the word "disaster" means. . . .. the sort of thing that occured here. Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 20:49, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
When I first read this article a year ago, right next to the mention of his final message on the sign, there was a picture of the actual sign. Out of curiosity, why was it removed? It's not like it was irrelevant. Answers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.50.165 ( talk) 05:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
i cannot find one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarksmom ( talk • contribs) 03:39, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
i found this pic of the mentioned statue if someone wants to put it in:
http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~bauerle/statue2.jpg
Clarksmom ( talk) 03:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
I consider myself fairly well-read and I have never heard of such a thing! Astounding.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.17.207.50 ( talk • contribs) 14:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Everything about this is stellar: the story, the writing, the attributions, the links...wow. I'm riveted. I think there might be a film script in this story...if it weren't so awful.
Congrats to the writers and everyone who edited it. It's absolutely fascinating and very well-researched.
Reading through one of the first-hand accounts (with its listing of victims' biographies) reminded me very much of 9/11. For these rural, peaceful people, this act must have had similar (if not larger) resonance with the than the WTC disaster.
Wow. Just a great wikipedia entry.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Helenabucket ( talk • contribs) 05:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Agreed, outstanding. -IJ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.142.200.182 ( talk • contribs) 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Excellent article, but I noticed one error that should be fixed. Under the heading "Second Explosion" is the following sentence:
"The explosion was heard from the school building. Rescuers heading to the scene of the Kehoe fire turned back and headed toward the school."
Although I realize the intent, the sentence is easily misread to imply that the explosion (at the school) was heard at the school. It seems to me this should read that the explosion at the school was heard across town or something to that effect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.150.95.237 ( talk) 16:45, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm very concerned that there is way to much direct copying to avoid being a copyright violation. If you look at the third source as an example the article barely rewords anything and several sentences are word for word copies. All of the information from some of the paragraphs comes from the one source which does not do enough to avoid copyright violations. I only checked a couple of the sources, but when one source is that much of a concern, all need to be checked. Especially as that source is cited several more times. The first cited source also doesn't agree with the numbers stated in the article, nor does it give a number for how many students were there on the day of the disaster. The 236 number is stated as being from 1922 in the source. - Taxman Talk 14:52, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I know nothing about US law, but in GB we have a "duty of care" law, relating to the care of someone known to be at risk of death or serious harm. Does the US not have something similar? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.7.138.13 ( talk) 19:19, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
"Prior to May 18, 1927, Kehoe had loaded the back seat of his car with metal debris. He threw in old tools, nails, pieces of rusted farm machinery, digging shovels, and anything else capable of producing shrapnel during an explosion." I think the author means "...anything capable of producing lethal fragments..." not shrapnel. Fragments and shrapnel are two very different things, as Wikipedia's own article illustrates. Frankwomble 17:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I just wanted to state that this is one of the best featured articles I have ever read on Wikipedia. Congrats to everyone who worked on it. -- Alabamaboy 00:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. This article is of the highest quality. Fantastic work.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Publius1688 ( talk • contribs) 02:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree as well. This is a fantastically written article with concise and informative information. Kudos to all who worked on it to make it the article it is today. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boofasten ( talk • contribs) 06:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Indeed, made me go google it after reading, for more information. Wish there were even more historic photographs used (such as from http://www.msu.edu/~daggy/tbsd/tbsd-p.htm ), individual photos of kids are bad, but photos of cleanup, the school, etc would be nice. Sherurcij ( talk) ( Terrorist Wikiproject) 04:03, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Umm, what's going on with the page right now?????— Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.117.228.138 ( talk • contribs) 16:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Good article. I'm soaked in history all the time, yet I'd never heard of this one. Nicely done. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Drye ( talk • contribs) 18:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Agreed, a great read, thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.72.172.16 ( talk • contribs) 31 March 2006 (UTC)
This event has been fictionalized by author Michael Frederick, so I thought it should be mentioned herein. His novel "Missouri Madness" tells the story of a man named Kedloe blowing up a school in Jerome, Missouri on May 18th, 1927. Hsemerson 18:13, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Don't forget the Wall Street bombing of 1920! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.175.81.235 ( talk) 16:20, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm wondering about the factoid in the original research that says he 'watched his stepmother burn'. Reading the original makes me think that the author was trying to spice up his story by showing that Kehoe was a bad person right from the start- there doesn't seem to be any way to verify this- by the nature of the act, only Kehoe and his stepmother were there (if Kehoe was even there at all). In fact, if it were true, Kehoe would have been committing a criminal act. The line in the original also implies that Kehoe actually sabotaged the stove, which also smacks of hearsay. I think it's dubious to include that content as true when it seems to be not to be research, but rather a dramatization. And in this particular case, I think the original author wanted to believe that Kehoe had to have been bad from the start- that there were warning signs- that people who do things like this are pure monsters. Lastly, I just want to point out that the original author also makes comments like him being buried 'isolated, just like he was in real life.' What about his wife? What about the fact that he served on the school board and was active in the community? Sure, you can make the argument that he was psychologically isolated and different, but then, who isn't isolated like that? That points to the orig. author trying to profile Kehoe into what he thinks all mass murderers are- psychopaths who aren't human, pure evil. Anyway, I just think we should take that part out. It seems like sensationalism. -- Stuball321 17:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Jumping into this way late but... The language you cite above, Hi There, specifically refers to the two exceptions that Jtmichcock outlines. In the first case, your quote specifically references someone who "recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person" and so falls into the category of that person causing the perilous situation to arise. The second case (the mother and the C-section), a parent has a duty of care towards their child (as mentioned by Jtmichcock) and so that case falls into that category. There is no general duty to rescue someone in peril outside the established exceptions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siofra ( talk • contribs) 16:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Under the Third Explosion section, the first paragraph notes that the explosion Kehoe set off with his rifle killed, among others, Postmast Glenn Smith. Later in the third paragraph the quoted road crew foreman states that after the last explosion one of his men was binding the wounds of the same Smith. These two statements seem to be in conflict; why would a responder bind the wounds of a dead person? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.197.136 ( talk) 00:23, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
In the article, the times of the first and second explosions are both currently reported as occurring at 8:45 am. 75.32.58.160 ( talk) 16:34, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Veterans Today which generally takes positions against US military policy, but supportive of Iranian policies, publishes many conspiracy theories from 9/11 to UFOs claims that Sandy Hook is " the worst elementary school massacre in America since General Erich Ludendorff, then head of German Intelligence, ordered the destruction of Bath School, Michigan on May 18th 1927, in a desperate effort to put pressure on the Coolidge Administration to cancel the Lindbergh Flight. This was after German technical experts had determined that the Ryan NYP Monoplane had the range to fly from New York to Paris and that it’s excellent Wright J-5 Whirlwind motor was sufficiently reliable to keep going for up to 40 hours, although the planning was triggered by concerns the previous year over a successful non-stop transatlantic flight, before the Ryan plane became a contender. Thirty-eight young children were murdered." There appears to be no evidence to support anything except the Bath school was attacked, and this may be the first appearance of such a theory. Redhanker ( talk) 23:14, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Not only the worst massacre in a school, it's one of the top ten mass murders in US history, below 9/11, the Happyland arson and the Branch Davidians — am I forgetting any? — Tamfang 00:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Oklahoma City Bombings? Oh, and I agree with all above this is a very well written article. I'd never heard of this before. Lisiate 04:49, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I haven't heard of this before, either. (But forgive me, I'm in my twenties.) It was very captivating and well written. Thanks to whoever wrote it! I also agree w/ the term "massacre" over "terrrorist attack". I doubt they would have described it as a terrorist attack back then, for sure.
During news coverage of 9/11, i heard several journalists say that previous to the Oklahoma City Bombing, the worst attack on America was the Meadow Mountain Massacre in which over 100 were killed. So that makes Bath School disaster 4th, no? DyNama ( talk) 06:25, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
This is the practice at VA Tech article, as well as the developing one on the Connecticut School Shooting. He died, but was not a victim. Parkwells ( talk) 22:32, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
He was one of the many victims of his mental disorder, which was the real perpetrator of the crime. 76.226.209.46 ( talk) 02:42, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
WIKI MOS recommends using blockquotes for lengthy quotes over 3 lines long; no explanation was given for reverting blockquotes. Parkwells ( talk) 13:12, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Kehoe's vehicle, which he filled with dynamite and items for shrapnel, was referred to as both a car and a truck. Editors should be consistent. It appears to have been a truck. Parkwells ( talk) 22:32, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
From my research today, I seem to remember that there are a couple of issues:
Shearonink ( talk) 00:03, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
In Wikipedia, "Bombing" redirects to Bombardment, which specifically deals with bombardment by artillery, not with someone setting off previously placed explosives. I've been bothered by the use of "bombing" in this article, even before looking that up. It most commonly implies an action - dropping a bomb by plane, attacking with a bomb, shooting armament by artillery. In this case, Kehoe set off bombs/incendiary devices that he had previously created, in two out of the three instances. Last, he fired into dynamite in his car, making his vehicle a car bomb. I think we should be more accurate in usage. Parkwells ( talk) 13:08, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Just reading Ellsworth's account - what a voice of experience he and his neighbors reflect. He felt Kehoe couldn't take being defeated in the election for town clerk, and started planning his "murderous revenge" on his neighbhors. Kehoe was known to be extremely difficult to work with on the school board, and Ellsworth said that was why he was defeated in the election. It's odd that no previous editors noted this issue of revenge on the community as a potential motive for his destruction of the school and their children. It seems more consistent with his personality as described than anger about property taxes. It is also consistent with patterns of revenge "rationales" seen in other murders.
A. McMullen, another neighbor, had noted Kehoe hadn't worked on his farm for a year (!) (before the explosion), and suspected he might be planning suicide. Ellsworth said that afterward, it was found that Kehoe had cut all his wire fences on his farm, cut down grapevines and put the plants back to avoid notice, and girdled all the small shade trees to kill them before setting off his explosives. (Chap. 5) (Another indication of his personality: soon after he and his wife moved in, he had killed a neighbor's dog that had come on his property and barked too often.) Parkwells ( talk) 13:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Had I read this first, I would not have posted a comment at "No source for motive, questionable as given". You covered all the points here. Gulbenk ( talk) 00:03, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Michael Gado's account, Hell Comes to Bath, published with no date on Crime Library.com < http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/history/bath/index_1.html>, does not satisfy criteria to be used as an RS (Reliable Source), so I have deleted it as a source. It has no footnotes, has some highly fictionalized portions (as on the first page), and presents no basis for some of its assertions. It gives Ellsworth's account, another published book, and "NY Times articles", as sources, but copies verbatim from Ellsworth's account. (Have not checked the others.) There is no evidence of peer review. Parkwells ( talk) 20:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
There is no quoted source for the offered motive of "enraged over property taxes". From accounts, it appears more accurate to say the motive was mental illness due to stress of personal and financial pressures. Mental illness does not mean he could not carry out a detailed plan; it suggests the irrational nature of his killing children and other innocents in his destruction of his house, farm and school. Parkwells ( talk) 22:32, 16 December 2012 (UTC) Parkwells ( talk) 13:10, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Even if you find a quote from a reliable source, it would only be speculation as to motive. Unlikely that it had anything to do with taxes, or financial pressures. He had financial resources. He simply chose to stop paying his mortgage, and he chose to stop farming. That appears to be just part of a larger plan. When he killed his wife and destroyed his house, he also destroyed his fences, livestock, equipment, and shade trees. Leaving little of value behind, for the mortgage company or anyone else. Highly intelligent, but petulant, Kehoe planned his actions for many months. The trigger may have been his election defeat. Rejection and humiliation. This looks like an act of revenge against the whole town (by killing their children). So, yes, some form of mental illness. Perhaps something more like a personality disorder. Gulbenk ( talk) 23:46, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
has no sourcing but appears to be from Bath Massacre by Arnie Bernstein (found here). If someone could find a copy of the book to check for that material from eyewitness Robert Gates it would be helpful. Shearonink ( talk) 19:20, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Bomboy, Scott (December 18, 2012). "Mass school bombing in 1927 puts Sandy Hook in context". National Constitution Center. Retrieved December 18, 2012. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 01:30, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
that was added with this edit and is the sentence
Seems excessive to me, don't think it necesarily adds encyclopedic value to the article, but am impressed by the sheer amount of sourcing. Should the content stay as is, be adjusted somewhat, or be removed? Shearonink ( talk) 03:26, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the many contributions on sources, copy editing and other changes to improve this article. It's looking really good! Parkwells ( talk) 13:24, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Why is this article titled "disaster" - as though a tornado swept through the town - when it was in fact a massacre perpetrated by one person? 174.71.75.181 ( talk) 08:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Sven Manguard ( talk · contribs) 04:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
GAN Quicksheet 1.24 SM
(
Criteria)
Starting comments: I know that I said that I was done with GAN reviews for this round, but this came out of a conversation with Shearonink on IRC, and I'm going to do it anyways.
1. Well written:
2. Accurate and verifiable:
3. Broad in coverage:
6. Image use:
7. Additional items not required for a GA, but requested by the reviewer:
Comments after the initial review: The reason why I insist on having paragraphs end with citations, even if the citation is in the next paragraph, is that articles evolve over time, and not ending paragraphs with sources means that there's an increased risk that something will get added in between. Which would be bad, because then the first part would have a different source than what it should.
Sven Manguard
Wha? 04:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
In the first paragraph, it says that 38 eight elementary school children were killed, and 36 schoolchildren. Which is it, and could someone edit that a bit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.42.137.215 ( talk) 00:38, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank You! I don't know too much about that topic, and that was a little confusing. Thanks for clarifying it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.42.137.215 ( talk) 16:01, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
This action should have been discussed on this page first. Not only is it against WP:MOS (extraneous space in title) this renaming is against historical precedent. Any time a researcher goes into the historical records this event is almost always called the "Bath School disaster" or the "Bath School Disaster". If warranted, a Request for comment should be instituted on this page to see what the general editorial consensus is about what this article should be called. Also, if people think that there is some confusion about the name or the event, then a redirect from the 'new name' to the original name and accompanying article would seem to have been a more viable solution. Shearonink ( talk) 16:55, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. Anastrophe ( talk) 16:57, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I would suggest first trying to "move the page back", then if that doesn't work, try "reverting" my move. Regarding the other related edits, I would try to "revert" them first, starting with the most recent ones, and if that doesn't work, then redo them manually. I would do more to help right now, but I am cheating on my job and about to get caught (Wikipedia is waaay too addictive.) Thanks, Scott P. ( talk) 17:49, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Per the following website ( http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2014/09/17/last-victim-bath-school-disaster-receives-marker/15764413/), one more student was killed. The article curently reads that a girl was the 45 victim, however, the attached article lists another as well as book that will be coming out soon. 192.172.14.69 ( talk) 16:14, 17 September 2014 (UTC)Mary 192.172.14.69 ( talk)
I prefer the article being titled the "Bath School disaster" and am looking for consensus. Andrew 327 02:46, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
The current title is fine "bombing". It is more descriptive and entirely accurate. John Alan Elson★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 04:08, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Support 'Bath School disaster'(yeah I know this isn't technically an RFC but anyway...) Article's title should remain "Bath School disaster" not "Bath School bombing/s". Thanks, Shearonink ( talk) 05:02, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
1. "Disaster" isn't very clear. It's a very antiquated phrasing, and it does not clearly state what it was. "Disaster" makes it sound more like it was a natural disaster or accident, rather than a deliberate series of bombing. "Disaster" is a phrase used at the time, but I don't think we should be bound to language of 1927.
2. Google results:
- Bath School Diaster - 21,900 - Bath School Bombing] - 28,100 results
3. Lots of reliable sources use "massacre" or "bombing" to describe it. These are used interchangeably with "disaster".
3. Similar large scale bombings of that era use the name "bombings".
4. Most large school shootings use "massacre" or "shooting". These are large scale attacks on school, and the only difference between those and this article is that a bomb was used. "Massacre", "bombing" and "shooting" should be the terms used to describe such events,
5. There were in fact several bombings in different locations, thus my preferred term "bombings".
Conclusion: Either "massacre" or "bombing" should be the title. It doesn't hugely matter.
-- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 05:40, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
(The comment immediately below was originally in a separate section but the page layout was subsequently altered.)
This article was renamed today against previous consensus and in my opinion an RFC should have been opened or at least comments should have been solicited on this page before changing it. Even if 'bombing/s' might be considered more descriptive by modern sensibilities, the historical record refers to this event as The Bath School Disaster. If we rename it after the fact, seems to me that doing so would be like renaming The Great Depression as The 1930s Panic. In my opinion, it would be more appropriate to have redirects for "Bath School bombing/s" than change the historical name.
Shearonink (
talk) 04:56, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
In economics a Depression is a specific clearly defined phenomenon. A "disaster" is not clearly defined at all and could mean anything. Could be an accidental exposition. An industrial accident, etc. And as I pointed out above, lots of modern sources call it the "Bath Massacre". For example:
That's a very high quality source, as it's published by a University press. Probably should go with their naming.
And actually a better case could be made for "Bath Massacre" or "Bath School Massacre", however I've always found the word "massacre" to be inherently kind of POV-y. The word "massacre" carries a POV (that it is bad, and yes even saying mass killing is bad is a POV). And how do you determine which mass killing is called a "massacre" and which aren't? I don't think there's any real neutral means of doing that, we just rely upon what the sources say. The words "bombbing" and "shooting" are much more neutral so I go with those. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 05:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Bath School Disaster. I believe that the article originally was called the Bath School Disaster, which is, I think , what it always had been called in Bath. Probably still is. I felt that changing the name because of what other events were called after it was the worst sort of revisionism. Well, perhaps not the worst, but pretty bad, Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 06:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Also support Bath School disaster. If this is going to be called "...bombings" shouldn't it be "Bath bombings"? We're talking about a shooting and arson on a farm, the bombing of a school, and a VBIED (car bomb) detonated near the school. The current title makes it sound like the only portion of the attack was the bombing at the school. It's a complicated situation, which is one reason historians and journalists named it the "Bath School disaster." The historically correct title passed both FA and GA reviews without issue. That doesn't mean that the name cannot be changed, but it should only be changed as a result of consensus. I'm OK with BRD, but now it's time for someone to revert the change until a clear consensus is established in favor of a renaming.
Now for specific responses to defenses of the new name.
TLDR: Even the proponents of the name change aren't 100% sold on the current name, meaning we should revert to the historical/FA/GA standard and then discuss. Andrew 327 06:55, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
I have looked through the responses above and there is no clear consensus for the article being renamed from its original 'Bath School disaster' to its present 'Bath School bombings', so I agree with User:Andrewman327 that the title should be moved back. However, since I am an involved editor, I cannot move the title/article back to the previous title. I have gone to the IRC-help channel to ask what to do but was unable to get an admin to assist so I am opening up an RFC in the hopes that placing the title issue within a Wikipedia process will get things moving. Shearonink ( talk) 15:16, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
This article has been added to List of terrorist incidents. However, I would not classify it as terrorism since it appears to be an isolated act of personal revenge, with no organization or ideology behind it. Mirror Vax 16:58, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
I am still making some revisions on the text as research materials come in so I have only done inline notes for the very top section. I will complete the inline parts right before it's ready to submit for peer review. If you have any items that would ordinarly be translated into inline materials, please use bracketed http links in the text and I will translate into inline notes as the article matures. Jtmichcock 02:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm not clear from the closing section of the article as to whether there still is a school at Bath. It sounds like the replacement building opened in 1928 was named after the senator as an "agricultural school", and that this replaced the damaged school, then notes that this ag school building was demolished in 1975. Did something get built to replace it, or is there no longer a school in Bath? GBC 17:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
The school that was blown up was actually rebuilt and used. I graduated from Bath in 1974, and that old brick building was used for the middle school until, I believe, around that time until a new high school was completed and then it was torn down. The "old" high school was then converted to the middle school. I recall that building very well. 209.244.187.142 13:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes i am currently in 10th grade at bath and the middle school still stand, just across the street is memorial park. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.84.189.85 ( talk) 00:25, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
"Unlike the Columbine High School massacre, there was no legislative response, either by the state or federal governments, aimed at preventing a recurrence, although pyrotol was quietly taken off the market."
Taken off the market by whom? The article Pyrotol states that sales were halted after the Bath school disaster. It leaves one hanging. Was it a spontaneous and unanimous decision by all the manufacturers and/or distributors, or what? Herostratus 18:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
One of the better Featured Articles I've ever read. Remarkably consistent, smoothly- and coherently-written, focused, crisp, and informative. Great job! - Silence 21:22, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
This is an excellent article. Very well done. I just have one problem to note: the links within the article which refer to the endnotes do not match. If one clicks on note 25 in the article (the reference to the KKK blaming the crime on Keogh's Roman Catholicism), you go to reference # 27 at the bottom. This should be fixed. -- Charles 04:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
This probably doesn't belong in the article, but I wanted to put it where people could find it. From The Autobiography of W. N. Ferris ( Woodbridge N. Ferris, an educator, was a former Michigan Governor and current U.S. Senator at the time of the disaster.)
A very good article, I like all the pictures. Kevin
Suspect this page has been vandalised - states the event took place in April 2007, and other dates seem to have been changed too. Afraid I'm not knowledgeable enough on the subject to amend. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.2.61.248 ( talk) 17:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC).
This is a featured article, so I'm reluctant to change it, but shouldn't the statement that it's the dealiest act of "mass murder" be changed to bombing? The mass murder article uses Columbine as an example, which would put this in the same league as VA Tech. Primeromundo 02:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Looks like this article referenced the disaster as the "deadliest" school-related killing in US history until yesterday, when the Va. Tech tragedy happened. Still, as the article on that event notes, there was a greater death toll here than in Blacksburg (45>33). As such, I am 99% sure this should be changed back to what it was before yesterday's edit storm, but since I am far from an expert on US school massacres, I wanted to make sure there wasn't some third, historically notable event of which I am not aware that would explain this. Editor Emeritus 12:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm unclear as to why the two links under "see also" are there. What would be more appropriate would be links to lists of mass murders, school shootings, or anti-government actions by individuals. The two links here could almost be chosen at random.-- Velvet elvis81 16:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I removed
So that the giant white space wasn't there anymore, now I don't see a place where to put it? §tepshep • ¡Talk to me! 00:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Dear fellow contributors
MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether or not dates are autoformatted. MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this.
There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:
Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. I'm seeking feedback about this proposal to remove it from the main text (using a script) in about a week's time on a trial basis. The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. BTW, anyone has the right to object, and my aim is not to argue against people on the issue. Tony (talk) 12:33, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Is "disaster" really the right word? It implies that it was an accident. Maybe "attacks" or "massacre" or something would be a better word. - Branddobbe ( talk) 11:15, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
From Final 2 victims of 1927 bombing to get tombstones: "A grant from a foundation will pay for their grave markers and a ceremony to place them will be held Nov. 11 at Pleasant Hill Cemetery in Bath."
On or after Nov. 11 this article should be updated to reflect this new information. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 19:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
The end-note system breaks the numbering when two {{ref|...}}'s are the same with a different one in between. Using standard <ref>...</ref> syntax with {{reflist}} works. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 04:19, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Re: this edit and its immediate predecessor:
There is a disagreement over whether "Ironically" fits. While true, using the word ironically is editorializing and the tone is not encyclopedic. For this reason, I favor removing it. WhisperToMe ( talk · contribs) removed it, SouthernNights ( talk · contribs) restored it a few days later.
Does anyone else have any comments on this? davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:03, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
But there was no shooting. He shot no one, and the rifle itself was no more a weapon the the detonation caps, it was just used to set off another explosion. He didn't need it since he set off the first bombing without it, it was just expedient. I feel that putting it as a shooting is misleading at best since that's not an accurate description of what happened, and that if we put the rifle as a weapon we should also include all the ingredients of the explosives since it's only consistent if we mention every single thing that went into making the final outcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.243.20.72 ( talk) 09:50, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
2nd paragraph, is Perry and Percy the same person?
Just thought it might be a mistake. Sorry if I wasted time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DAaaMan64 ( talk • contribs) 09:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was not moved. All arguments grounded on what would be a more accurate description by a plain language interpretation of the title have been discounted as irrelevant. When there is no title for something chosen by the world as its name, then (and only then) do we try to come up with a neutral and accurately descriptive title. When the world has chosen a name, shown here by the predominance of this title in search results, with an eye toward which focus on reliable sources, which a Google books search does far more than a web search (always go to Google books and news archive before Google web), then our own judgment of the title's neutrality and accuracy has no place. As evidenced below, the common name appears to be the current title, including over bombing from the book search, the only other contender. The suggested title isn't even in the running.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 12:22, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Bath School disaster → Bath School massacre —
STRONGLY OPPOSE changing the name of this article. Just because the National Inquirer demands more and more sensational headlines does not mean that wikipedia has to follow suit. Shortly after this calamity occurred a book called the Bath School Disaster was published. That is where the name came from. It is not just descriptive, there is an actual history to the name. When we start letting google name our articles we are ( opinion) in deep dodo. Carptrash ( talk) 04:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
No contest, as far as I'm concerned. But for kicks, let's check Google Books produces as measure of what published sources say rather than bloggers and miscellaneous web sites.
Again no contest. older ≠ wiser 17:07, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I apologize for my ill chosen words and images in my last posting. It was not my intention to offend. However I believe that looking at what we (wikipedia) have to say about disasters will reveal that the word is appropriate in this context. I have emailed the Bath School Board to try and learn how this event is referred to there. About 20 years ago I visited Bath (where I picked up my copy of the book mentioned previously) and discussed the bombing with some locales who assured me that the injured total was much higher than is typically reported. This horror was much more than mass murder, though that was a terrible part of it. "Bombing"? Well, okay but the word "disaster" means. . . .. the sort of thing that occured here. Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 20:49, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
When I first read this article a year ago, right next to the mention of his final message on the sign, there was a picture of the actual sign. Out of curiosity, why was it removed? It's not like it was irrelevant. Answers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.50.165 ( talk) 05:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
i cannot find one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarksmom ( talk • contribs) 03:39, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
i found this pic of the mentioned statue if someone wants to put it in:
http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~bauerle/statue2.jpg
Clarksmom ( talk) 03:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
I consider myself fairly well-read and I have never heard of such a thing! Astounding.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.17.207.50 ( talk • contribs) 14:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Everything about this is stellar: the story, the writing, the attributions, the links...wow. I'm riveted. I think there might be a film script in this story...if it weren't so awful.
Congrats to the writers and everyone who edited it. It's absolutely fascinating and very well-researched.
Reading through one of the first-hand accounts (with its listing of victims' biographies) reminded me very much of 9/11. For these rural, peaceful people, this act must have had similar (if not larger) resonance with the than the WTC disaster.
Wow. Just a great wikipedia entry.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Helenabucket ( talk • contribs) 05:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Agreed, outstanding. -IJ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.142.200.182 ( talk • contribs) 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Excellent article, but I noticed one error that should be fixed. Under the heading "Second Explosion" is the following sentence:
"The explosion was heard from the school building. Rescuers heading to the scene of the Kehoe fire turned back and headed toward the school."
Although I realize the intent, the sentence is easily misread to imply that the explosion (at the school) was heard at the school. It seems to me this should read that the explosion at the school was heard across town or something to that effect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.150.95.237 ( talk) 16:45, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm very concerned that there is way to much direct copying to avoid being a copyright violation. If you look at the third source as an example the article barely rewords anything and several sentences are word for word copies. All of the information from some of the paragraphs comes from the one source which does not do enough to avoid copyright violations. I only checked a couple of the sources, but when one source is that much of a concern, all need to be checked. Especially as that source is cited several more times. The first cited source also doesn't agree with the numbers stated in the article, nor does it give a number for how many students were there on the day of the disaster. The 236 number is stated as being from 1922 in the source. - Taxman Talk 14:52, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I know nothing about US law, but in GB we have a "duty of care" law, relating to the care of someone known to be at risk of death or serious harm. Does the US not have something similar? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.7.138.13 ( talk) 19:19, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
"Prior to May 18, 1927, Kehoe had loaded the back seat of his car with metal debris. He threw in old tools, nails, pieces of rusted farm machinery, digging shovels, and anything else capable of producing shrapnel during an explosion." I think the author means "...anything capable of producing lethal fragments..." not shrapnel. Fragments and shrapnel are two very different things, as Wikipedia's own article illustrates. Frankwomble 17:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I just wanted to state that this is one of the best featured articles I have ever read on Wikipedia. Congrats to everyone who worked on it. -- Alabamaboy 00:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. This article is of the highest quality. Fantastic work.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Publius1688 ( talk • contribs) 02:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree as well. This is a fantastically written article with concise and informative information. Kudos to all who worked on it to make it the article it is today. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boofasten ( talk • contribs) 06:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Indeed, made me go google it after reading, for more information. Wish there were even more historic photographs used (such as from http://www.msu.edu/~daggy/tbsd/tbsd-p.htm ), individual photos of kids are bad, but photos of cleanup, the school, etc would be nice. Sherurcij ( talk) ( Terrorist Wikiproject) 04:03, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Umm, what's going on with the page right now?????— Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.117.228.138 ( talk • contribs) 16:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Good article. I'm soaked in history all the time, yet I'd never heard of this one. Nicely done. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Drye ( talk • contribs) 18:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Agreed, a great read, thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.72.172.16 ( talk • contribs) 31 March 2006 (UTC)
This event has been fictionalized by author Michael Frederick, so I thought it should be mentioned herein. His novel "Missouri Madness" tells the story of a man named Kedloe blowing up a school in Jerome, Missouri on May 18th, 1927. Hsemerson 18:13, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Don't forget the Wall Street bombing of 1920! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.175.81.235 ( talk) 16:20, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm wondering about the factoid in the original research that says he 'watched his stepmother burn'. Reading the original makes me think that the author was trying to spice up his story by showing that Kehoe was a bad person right from the start- there doesn't seem to be any way to verify this- by the nature of the act, only Kehoe and his stepmother were there (if Kehoe was even there at all). In fact, if it were true, Kehoe would have been committing a criminal act. The line in the original also implies that Kehoe actually sabotaged the stove, which also smacks of hearsay. I think it's dubious to include that content as true when it seems to be not to be research, but rather a dramatization. And in this particular case, I think the original author wanted to believe that Kehoe had to have been bad from the start- that there were warning signs- that people who do things like this are pure monsters. Lastly, I just want to point out that the original author also makes comments like him being buried 'isolated, just like he was in real life.' What about his wife? What about the fact that he served on the school board and was active in the community? Sure, you can make the argument that he was psychologically isolated and different, but then, who isn't isolated like that? That points to the orig. author trying to profile Kehoe into what he thinks all mass murderers are- psychopaths who aren't human, pure evil. Anyway, I just think we should take that part out. It seems like sensationalism. -- Stuball321 17:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Jumping into this way late but... The language you cite above, Hi There, specifically refers to the two exceptions that Jtmichcock outlines. In the first case, your quote specifically references someone who "recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person" and so falls into the category of that person causing the perilous situation to arise. The second case (the mother and the C-section), a parent has a duty of care towards their child (as mentioned by Jtmichcock) and so that case falls into that category. There is no general duty to rescue someone in peril outside the established exceptions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siofra ( talk • contribs) 16:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Under the Third Explosion section, the first paragraph notes that the explosion Kehoe set off with his rifle killed, among others, Postmast Glenn Smith. Later in the third paragraph the quoted road crew foreman states that after the last explosion one of his men was binding the wounds of the same Smith. These two statements seem to be in conflict; why would a responder bind the wounds of a dead person? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.197.136 ( talk) 00:23, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
In the article, the times of the first and second explosions are both currently reported as occurring at 8:45 am. 75.32.58.160 ( talk) 16:34, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Veterans Today which generally takes positions against US military policy, but supportive of Iranian policies, publishes many conspiracy theories from 9/11 to UFOs claims that Sandy Hook is " the worst elementary school massacre in America since General Erich Ludendorff, then head of German Intelligence, ordered the destruction of Bath School, Michigan on May 18th 1927, in a desperate effort to put pressure on the Coolidge Administration to cancel the Lindbergh Flight. This was after German technical experts had determined that the Ryan NYP Monoplane had the range to fly from New York to Paris and that it’s excellent Wright J-5 Whirlwind motor was sufficiently reliable to keep going for up to 40 hours, although the planning was triggered by concerns the previous year over a successful non-stop transatlantic flight, before the Ryan plane became a contender. Thirty-eight young children were murdered." There appears to be no evidence to support anything except the Bath school was attacked, and this may be the first appearance of such a theory. Redhanker ( talk) 23:14, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Not only the worst massacre in a school, it's one of the top ten mass murders in US history, below 9/11, the Happyland arson and the Branch Davidians — am I forgetting any? — Tamfang 00:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Oklahoma City Bombings? Oh, and I agree with all above this is a very well written article. I'd never heard of this before. Lisiate 04:49, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I haven't heard of this before, either. (But forgive me, I'm in my twenties.) It was very captivating and well written. Thanks to whoever wrote it! I also agree w/ the term "massacre" over "terrrorist attack". I doubt they would have described it as a terrorist attack back then, for sure.
During news coverage of 9/11, i heard several journalists say that previous to the Oklahoma City Bombing, the worst attack on America was the Meadow Mountain Massacre in which over 100 were killed. So that makes Bath School disaster 4th, no? DyNama ( talk) 06:25, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
This is the practice at VA Tech article, as well as the developing one on the Connecticut School Shooting. He died, but was not a victim. Parkwells ( talk) 22:32, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
He was one of the many victims of his mental disorder, which was the real perpetrator of the crime. 76.226.209.46 ( talk) 02:42, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
WIKI MOS recommends using blockquotes for lengthy quotes over 3 lines long; no explanation was given for reverting blockquotes. Parkwells ( talk) 13:12, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Kehoe's vehicle, which he filled with dynamite and items for shrapnel, was referred to as both a car and a truck. Editors should be consistent. It appears to have been a truck. Parkwells ( talk) 22:32, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
From my research today, I seem to remember that there are a couple of issues:
Shearonink ( talk) 00:03, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
In Wikipedia, "Bombing" redirects to Bombardment, which specifically deals with bombardment by artillery, not with someone setting off previously placed explosives. I've been bothered by the use of "bombing" in this article, even before looking that up. It most commonly implies an action - dropping a bomb by plane, attacking with a bomb, shooting armament by artillery. In this case, Kehoe set off bombs/incendiary devices that he had previously created, in two out of the three instances. Last, he fired into dynamite in his car, making his vehicle a car bomb. I think we should be more accurate in usage. Parkwells ( talk) 13:08, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Just reading Ellsworth's account - what a voice of experience he and his neighbors reflect. He felt Kehoe couldn't take being defeated in the election for town clerk, and started planning his "murderous revenge" on his neighbhors. Kehoe was known to be extremely difficult to work with on the school board, and Ellsworth said that was why he was defeated in the election. It's odd that no previous editors noted this issue of revenge on the community as a potential motive for his destruction of the school and their children. It seems more consistent with his personality as described than anger about property taxes. It is also consistent with patterns of revenge "rationales" seen in other murders.
A. McMullen, another neighbor, had noted Kehoe hadn't worked on his farm for a year (!) (before the explosion), and suspected he might be planning suicide. Ellsworth said that afterward, it was found that Kehoe had cut all his wire fences on his farm, cut down grapevines and put the plants back to avoid notice, and girdled all the small shade trees to kill them before setting off his explosives. (Chap. 5) (Another indication of his personality: soon after he and his wife moved in, he had killed a neighbor's dog that had come on his property and barked too often.) Parkwells ( talk) 13:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Had I read this first, I would not have posted a comment at "No source for motive, questionable as given". You covered all the points here. Gulbenk ( talk) 00:03, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Michael Gado's account, Hell Comes to Bath, published with no date on Crime Library.com < http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/history/bath/index_1.html>, does not satisfy criteria to be used as an RS (Reliable Source), so I have deleted it as a source. It has no footnotes, has some highly fictionalized portions (as on the first page), and presents no basis for some of its assertions. It gives Ellsworth's account, another published book, and "NY Times articles", as sources, but copies verbatim from Ellsworth's account. (Have not checked the others.) There is no evidence of peer review. Parkwells ( talk) 20:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
There is no quoted source for the offered motive of "enraged over property taxes". From accounts, it appears more accurate to say the motive was mental illness due to stress of personal and financial pressures. Mental illness does not mean he could not carry out a detailed plan; it suggests the irrational nature of his killing children and other innocents in his destruction of his house, farm and school. Parkwells ( talk) 22:32, 16 December 2012 (UTC) Parkwells ( talk) 13:10, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Even if you find a quote from a reliable source, it would only be speculation as to motive. Unlikely that it had anything to do with taxes, or financial pressures. He had financial resources. He simply chose to stop paying his mortgage, and he chose to stop farming. That appears to be just part of a larger plan. When he killed his wife and destroyed his house, he also destroyed his fences, livestock, equipment, and shade trees. Leaving little of value behind, for the mortgage company or anyone else. Highly intelligent, but petulant, Kehoe planned his actions for many months. The trigger may have been his election defeat. Rejection and humiliation. This looks like an act of revenge against the whole town (by killing their children). So, yes, some form of mental illness. Perhaps something more like a personality disorder. Gulbenk ( talk) 23:46, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
has no sourcing but appears to be from Bath Massacre by Arnie Bernstein (found here). If someone could find a copy of the book to check for that material from eyewitness Robert Gates it would be helpful. Shearonink ( talk) 19:20, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Bomboy, Scott (December 18, 2012). "Mass school bombing in 1927 puts Sandy Hook in context". National Constitution Center. Retrieved December 18, 2012. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 01:30, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
that was added with this edit and is the sentence
Seems excessive to me, don't think it necesarily adds encyclopedic value to the article, but am impressed by the sheer amount of sourcing. Should the content stay as is, be adjusted somewhat, or be removed? Shearonink ( talk) 03:26, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the many contributions on sources, copy editing and other changes to improve this article. It's looking really good! Parkwells ( talk) 13:24, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Why is this article titled "disaster" - as though a tornado swept through the town - when it was in fact a massacre perpetrated by one person? 174.71.75.181 ( talk) 08:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Sven Manguard ( talk · contribs) 04:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
GAN Quicksheet 1.24 SM
(
Criteria)
Starting comments: I know that I said that I was done with GAN reviews for this round, but this came out of a conversation with Shearonink on IRC, and I'm going to do it anyways.
1. Well written:
2. Accurate and verifiable:
3. Broad in coverage:
6. Image use:
7. Additional items not required for a GA, but requested by the reviewer:
Comments after the initial review: The reason why I insist on having paragraphs end with citations, even if the citation is in the next paragraph, is that articles evolve over time, and not ending paragraphs with sources means that there's an increased risk that something will get added in between. Which would be bad, because then the first part would have a different source than what it should.
Sven Manguard
Wha? 04:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
In the first paragraph, it says that 38 eight elementary school children were killed, and 36 schoolchildren. Which is it, and could someone edit that a bit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.42.137.215 ( talk) 00:38, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank You! I don't know too much about that topic, and that was a little confusing. Thanks for clarifying it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.42.137.215 ( talk) 16:01, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
This action should have been discussed on this page first. Not only is it against WP:MOS (extraneous space in title) this renaming is against historical precedent. Any time a researcher goes into the historical records this event is almost always called the "Bath School disaster" or the "Bath School Disaster". If warranted, a Request for comment should be instituted on this page to see what the general editorial consensus is about what this article should be called. Also, if people think that there is some confusion about the name or the event, then a redirect from the 'new name' to the original name and accompanying article would seem to have been a more viable solution. Shearonink ( talk) 16:55, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. Anastrophe ( talk) 16:57, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I would suggest first trying to "move the page back", then if that doesn't work, try "reverting" my move. Regarding the other related edits, I would try to "revert" them first, starting with the most recent ones, and if that doesn't work, then redo them manually. I would do more to help right now, but I am cheating on my job and about to get caught (Wikipedia is waaay too addictive.) Thanks, Scott P. ( talk) 17:49, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Per the following website ( http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2014/09/17/last-victim-bath-school-disaster-receives-marker/15764413/), one more student was killed. The article curently reads that a girl was the 45 victim, however, the attached article lists another as well as book that will be coming out soon. 192.172.14.69 ( talk) 16:14, 17 September 2014 (UTC)Mary 192.172.14.69 ( talk)
I prefer the article being titled the "Bath School disaster" and am looking for consensus. Andrew 327 02:46, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
The current title is fine "bombing". It is more descriptive and entirely accurate. John Alan Elson★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 04:08, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Support 'Bath School disaster'(yeah I know this isn't technically an RFC but anyway...) Article's title should remain "Bath School disaster" not "Bath School bombing/s". Thanks, Shearonink ( talk) 05:02, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
1. "Disaster" isn't very clear. It's a very antiquated phrasing, and it does not clearly state what it was. "Disaster" makes it sound more like it was a natural disaster or accident, rather than a deliberate series of bombing. "Disaster" is a phrase used at the time, but I don't think we should be bound to language of 1927.
2. Google results:
- Bath School Diaster - 21,900 - Bath School Bombing] - 28,100 results
3. Lots of reliable sources use "massacre" or "bombing" to describe it. These are used interchangeably with "disaster".
3. Similar large scale bombings of that era use the name "bombings".
4. Most large school shootings use "massacre" or "shooting". These are large scale attacks on school, and the only difference between those and this article is that a bomb was used. "Massacre", "bombing" and "shooting" should be the terms used to describe such events,
5. There were in fact several bombings in different locations, thus my preferred term "bombings".
Conclusion: Either "massacre" or "bombing" should be the title. It doesn't hugely matter.
-- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 05:40, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
(The comment immediately below was originally in a separate section but the page layout was subsequently altered.)
This article was renamed today against previous consensus and in my opinion an RFC should have been opened or at least comments should have been solicited on this page before changing it. Even if 'bombing/s' might be considered more descriptive by modern sensibilities, the historical record refers to this event as The Bath School Disaster. If we rename it after the fact, seems to me that doing so would be like renaming The Great Depression as The 1930s Panic. In my opinion, it would be more appropriate to have redirects for "Bath School bombing/s" than change the historical name.
Shearonink (
talk) 04:56, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
In economics a Depression is a specific clearly defined phenomenon. A "disaster" is not clearly defined at all and could mean anything. Could be an accidental exposition. An industrial accident, etc. And as I pointed out above, lots of modern sources call it the "Bath Massacre". For example:
That's a very high quality source, as it's published by a University press. Probably should go with their naming.
And actually a better case could be made for "Bath Massacre" or "Bath School Massacre", however I've always found the word "massacre" to be inherently kind of POV-y. The word "massacre" carries a POV (that it is bad, and yes even saying mass killing is bad is a POV). And how do you determine which mass killing is called a "massacre" and which aren't? I don't think there's any real neutral means of doing that, we just rely upon what the sources say. The words "bombbing" and "shooting" are much more neutral so I go with those. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 05:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Bath School Disaster. I believe that the article originally was called the Bath School Disaster, which is, I think , what it always had been called in Bath. Probably still is. I felt that changing the name because of what other events were called after it was the worst sort of revisionism. Well, perhaps not the worst, but pretty bad, Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 06:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Also support Bath School disaster. If this is going to be called "...bombings" shouldn't it be "Bath bombings"? We're talking about a shooting and arson on a farm, the bombing of a school, and a VBIED (car bomb) detonated near the school. The current title makes it sound like the only portion of the attack was the bombing at the school. It's a complicated situation, which is one reason historians and journalists named it the "Bath School disaster." The historically correct title passed both FA and GA reviews without issue. That doesn't mean that the name cannot be changed, but it should only be changed as a result of consensus. I'm OK with BRD, but now it's time for someone to revert the change until a clear consensus is established in favor of a renaming.
Now for specific responses to defenses of the new name.
TLDR: Even the proponents of the name change aren't 100% sold on the current name, meaning we should revert to the historical/FA/GA standard and then discuss. Andrew 327 06:55, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
I have looked through the responses above and there is no clear consensus for the article being renamed from its original 'Bath School disaster' to its present 'Bath School bombings', so I agree with User:Andrewman327 that the title should be moved back. However, since I am an involved editor, I cannot move the title/article back to the previous title. I have gone to the IRC-help channel to ask what to do but was unable to get an admin to assist so I am opening up an RFC in the hopes that placing the title issue within a Wikipedia process will get things moving. Shearonink ( talk) 15:16, 21 November 2014 (UTC)