This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Floyd Collins 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 |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is a record with the title "The Death of Floyd Collins" that was recorded soon after Floyd Collins death. It is reported that this was the FIRST record to ever sell one million (1,000,000) copies. Quite a trivia question to which very few people would ever guess the answer!
Collectors of cave memoribilia still find copies of this record for sale in used record stores and on-line sites.
Larry E. Matthews ( talk) 21:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Floyd Collins does not need a disambiguation between him and the musical about him. His article should be titled Floyd Collins as it was until recently. The musical is handled at the top of the article itself. WTucker ( talk) 01:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
How was it legal for someone to buy the land of the previous occupants whos son died in tragic circumstances then DIG HIM UP and use him as a tourist attraction? How can a national park body also be involved in that? How can the family 'protest' yet be left helpless while their dead kid is a fucking theme park manniquin? If this were in some third world nation run by warlords I'd understand, but this is in a first world country with a legal system, why were no legal remedies made available to the family and why did no law society or at least some lawyer with a soul (I know in the US your lawyers are different to us lawyers in the rest of the world where the highest attainable professional degree is a law degree and it isn't handed out with breakfast cereals.) and sort the matter out for them?
There HAS to be more details to it than that, it just isn't possible to buy someone's land and thusly assume ownership of the corpse of the previous occupants dead child. That's illegal and has been illegal from time immemorial as interference with a corpse (We're talking pre-Blackburn era common law stuff here!) so surely there's something missing from the article that would explain this. They must have legally agreed to it in contract somehow when selling the property?! And thus they were bound to it? That's the ONLY possible legal reason I could foresee this even being possible, but please, can anyone with history on this expand on it a bit for us?
Also, it's probably worth noting Floyd's Tomb by now, it's been around for a dozen years and is one of the worlds first creepypastas in his honor. ;) BaSH PR0MPT ( talk) 08:03, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
To everyone removing mentions of the recent YouTube documentary: Stop, please?
This is by far the most attention this caver and his fate has received since 1979 when Roger Brucker's Trapped! was published. It is a comprehensive and feature-length account of his death that has generated nearly 7 million viewings, yet a brief reference to its existence is being treated as vandalistic and unnoteworthy. Specifically, by Wikipedians like @ RteeeeKed and then needlessly semi-protected by @ Anachronist. Wikipedia recognizes popular web content about specific topics like this as generally notable. Our job is to remove vandalism, not context.
If you're confused, I encourage you to refresh yourself with Wikipedia's policy on content removal and web content notability WP:WEB and then reassess this exclusion and possibly others you may have made in the past. In short, removing references to content that has influenced the revisitation of incredibly niche history by literally millions of people is overzealous, obnoxious, and unhelpful. Knock it off. 2600:8800:118:6D00:9144:E3B6:C399:CEA9 ( talk) 03:25, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Floyd Collins 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 |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is a record with the title "The Death of Floyd Collins" that was recorded soon after Floyd Collins death. It is reported that this was the FIRST record to ever sell one million (1,000,000) copies. Quite a trivia question to which very few people would ever guess the answer!
Collectors of cave memoribilia still find copies of this record for sale in used record stores and on-line sites.
Larry E. Matthews ( talk) 21:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Floyd Collins does not need a disambiguation between him and the musical about him. His article should be titled Floyd Collins as it was until recently. The musical is handled at the top of the article itself. WTucker ( talk) 01:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
How was it legal for someone to buy the land of the previous occupants whos son died in tragic circumstances then DIG HIM UP and use him as a tourist attraction? How can a national park body also be involved in that? How can the family 'protest' yet be left helpless while their dead kid is a fucking theme park manniquin? If this were in some third world nation run by warlords I'd understand, but this is in a first world country with a legal system, why were no legal remedies made available to the family and why did no law society or at least some lawyer with a soul (I know in the US your lawyers are different to us lawyers in the rest of the world where the highest attainable professional degree is a law degree and it isn't handed out with breakfast cereals.) and sort the matter out for them?
There HAS to be more details to it than that, it just isn't possible to buy someone's land and thusly assume ownership of the corpse of the previous occupants dead child. That's illegal and has been illegal from time immemorial as interference with a corpse (We're talking pre-Blackburn era common law stuff here!) so surely there's something missing from the article that would explain this. They must have legally agreed to it in contract somehow when selling the property?! And thus they were bound to it? That's the ONLY possible legal reason I could foresee this even being possible, but please, can anyone with history on this expand on it a bit for us?
Also, it's probably worth noting Floyd's Tomb by now, it's been around for a dozen years and is one of the worlds first creepypastas in his honor. ;) BaSH PR0MPT ( talk) 08:03, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
To everyone removing mentions of the recent YouTube documentary: Stop, please?
This is by far the most attention this caver and his fate has received since 1979 when Roger Brucker's Trapped! was published. It is a comprehensive and feature-length account of his death that has generated nearly 7 million viewings, yet a brief reference to its existence is being treated as vandalistic and unnoteworthy. Specifically, by Wikipedians like @ RteeeeKed and then needlessly semi-protected by @ Anachronist. Wikipedia recognizes popular web content about specific topics like this as generally notable. Our job is to remove vandalism, not context.
If you're confused, I encourage you to refresh yourself with Wikipedia's policy on content removal and web content notability WP:WEB and then reassess this exclusion and possibly others you may have made in the past. In short, removing references to content that has influenced the revisitation of incredibly niche history by literally millions of people is overzealous, obnoxious, and unhelpful. Knock it off. 2600:8800:118:6D00:9144:E3B6:C399:CEA9 ( talk) 03:25, 14 October 2022 (UTC)