Talk:Davy Crockett

Discussion

This article -- regarding Corckett's death -- fails to account for James Crispin's analysis of the journal and other peer-reviewed forensic studies conducted in 1998 and 2001 that have verified its authenticity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.200.245.136 (talk) 22:46, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Crockett's Masonic apron, there is no Weakley Lodge in Tennessee (see http://www.grandlodge-tn.org/). There are six lodges in Weakley County, TN. It should be easy enough to contact each and verify the location of the apron.

Title of article

It is misleading and reinforces notions of the myths of David Crockett for the principal title of this article to be "Davy Crockett." The title of the article should be "David Crockett" with references to "Davy" being redirected there, not the other way around. As Michael Wallis makes clear in his biography, Crockett never signed his name "Davy" and there are few if any references to him by that name in his lifetime. I don't know how to change that redirection link myself. David Crockett was an interesting and important historical figure, "Davy" Crockett is largely a cartoonish myth (although the development of the myth itself is also important history).

Actually the rest of the article is very unbalanced in terms of Crockett's political life -- a large section on his involvement in Texas, for example, which was really to a large degree anomalous politically, compared to the rest of his life. I will leave that as a dangling critique for the time being.

Jonwurl (talk) 13:38, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME. He's almost universally known as "Davy" in modern times. Bms4880 (talk) 13:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

He's not known as "Davy" in any scholarly sense, only in popular thought. I'm not saying it should be ignored -- but "Davy" should redirect to David, not the other way around. Who he actually was, was a member of Congress of the United States. "Davy" on the other hand was a Disney-esque myth (largely), and it does a disservice to general scholarship and the venerability of the history of the United States government to title the article this way. If WikiPedia standards are otherwise, then these standards probably need to change. In a certain sense it is even in correct -- the person "universally known as Davy in modern times" was not actually a real person, just Fess Parker acting as "Davy." So by this argument there should be two articles. I am not saying there should be two articles, because the mythology definitely derived from the actual person, but it is misleading and inaccurate to reinforce this, at least if the goal is to help educate people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonwurl (talk • contribs) 19:47, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I reviewed the "Common names" standard. Calling David Crockett "Davy" is quite different than calling William Clinton "Bill." I think it is the standard that is in error here, so I guess I will need to take it up there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonwurl (talk • contribs) 19:54, 2 November 2012 (UTC)