Talk:Jim Thorpe

Childhood

Hmmm... looks like we should probably find something more about his childhood and about his life after Stockholm (he was one of the early stars of the National Football League), and a picture might be nice too. - jredmond 03:39, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I believe some of the facts are mistaken. I have read from several sources that he was 5'11'' 180 in his 1912 football season and that his mother was 1/4 french. I will try to find where I have read that before, i think it was on espn--not sure. Anyone know the source of his height and wieght in the article?
--NoYes 05:30, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think the link to pentathlon in the article might be confusing - I don't think the events were the same as in the ancient pentathlon, I suspect they were all track and field events. A google search suggests they were long jump, 200m sprint, discus, javelin and 1500m. Average Earthman 12:23, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This article now reads,

A pentathlon based on the ancient Greek event had been organized at the 1906 Summer Olympics, but the 1912 edition would consist of the long jump, the javelin throw, 200-meter dash, the discus throw and the 1500-meter run.

The modern pentathlon, which consists of running, swimming, shooting, equestrian and fencing, was begun by the Baron de Coubertin in 1912, which I believe he intended to replace the pentathlon of ancient Greece. I've never heard anything about this other pentathlon, the one Thorpe is reported to have won. Taco Deposit 14:13, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC)

Well, he definitely won it, the IOC website says he did. Unfortunately, they don't say what events were actually in it. There is [one website] which has a biography of Thorpe on it that lists the five events, but I'd rather get some firmer evidence for it than rely on something someone has written on a webpage with no cites. The BBC has on more than one occasion said the pentathlon Thorpe won contained the events in the Modern Pentathlon, but they're wrong - the IOC website itself gives one Gosta Lilliehook as the winner of the Modern Pentathlon, and the Pentathlon Thorpe won is listed under the Athletics category. Average Earthman 15:13, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Gosta Lillehook won the first Olympic 'Modern' pentathlon, and this Jim Thorpe article seems correct. In 1912, 1920 and 1924 there were two pentathlons at the Olympic games. One was the 'modern' and the other the 'traditional' (athletics) pentathlon. In addition the athletics pentathlon was replaced with the decathlon. The modern pentathlon was not to replace the athletics version it was a new independent event. Pentathlon (athletics version) results can be found at http://www.gbrathletics.com/ic/ogm.htm and can be viewed in the table below.

Event:	Gold:		Silver:		Bronze:
1906#	Hjalmer Mellander SWE	24	István Mudin HUN	25	Eric Lemming SWE	29
1908	not held
1912	Jim Thorpe USA & Ferdinand Bie NOR	7* 21	James Donahue USA	29	Frank Lukeman CAN	29
1920	Eero Lehtonen FIN	14	Everett Bradley USA	24	Hugo Lahtinen FIN	26
1924	Eero Lehtonen FIN	14	Elemér Somfay HUN	16	Robert LeGendre USA	18

Note# -The events in the athletic pentathlon were long jump, javelin, 200 metres, discus, 1500 metres although in 1906 the more traditional greek events were contested, standing long jump, discus (greek style), javelin, 192 metres (one stade), graeco-roman wrestling.

Note*-Jim Thorpes Olympic results were re-instated in 1982. David D. 20:55, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

While I cannot offer any sources, I remember with pretty good confidence, from reading a young-adult book about Thorpe which was definitely written before 1980, that all his events at the 1912 Olympics were track and field. (There was an anecdote about how his entire preparation for the long jump consisted of making some chalk marks on the pavement.) I don't have the book any longer, but it made a great impression on me and I reread it many times. So consider this corroborating evidence that his pentathalon was not the "Modern" version.

Rpresser 00:53, 2004 Aug 27 (UTC)

Thorpe first president of NFL

I don't understand what the "NFL Presidents" table at the end of the "Reinstated" section is supposed to be. Can someone clarify this? -Aaron jul 18 2005

It appears to refers to the fact that he was the first president. He was followed by xxx and preceded by no one since he was the first. I think it should be in the football baseball section since there is says Thorpe was named the APFA's first president, Or is it meant to be a footer? Also the table would make more sense if Thorpes name was actually in the table. Don't ask me how to fix it I'm not sure how this kind of table works. It seems to get it's data from information that is stored somewhere else in wikipedia. David D. 04:26, 19 July

• I fixed the table using {{succession box}} Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:46, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Mach Chunk

I always thought Jim Thorpes Indian name was Mauch Chunk?2005 (UTC)--User talk:Scottfisher Thanks, Scotty

No, Mauch Chunk (see the wikiarticle) was the name of the town in PA that was renamed "Jim Thorpe" in his honor.--BillFlis 21:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

knocking the crap out of a future President

Future President Dwight Eisenhower injured his knee trying to tackle Thorpe during that game.

Eisenhower recalled of Thorpe in a 1961 speech. "Here and there, there are some people who are supremely endowed," "My memory goes back to Jim Thorpe. He never practiced in his life, and he could do anything better than any other football player I ever saw."[1][2]

George Halas' NFL record 98-yard fumble return was off a Thorpe fumble. Halas explained that with a very angry Thorpe chasing him, he had a special incentive to run as fast as he ever did. WHPratt (talk) 14:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Greatest

I've moved the following from the article page because it is an opinion, not a fact, and is unsourced.

Jim Thorpe is considered to be one the three greatest athletes of the 20th Century next to Muhammed Ali and Michael Jordan. And the greatest during the first half of the century.

-- Dalbury^(Talk) 23:00, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

It's fairly common knowledge Thorpe is considered one of the greatest athletes of the century. Not every statement has to be referenced esp when its considered common knowledge. I'm sure I can dig up a source which is by necessity an opinion of itself which makes that claim. Is that necessary in this particular instance? Also in the following section there is personal communication which is considered even in scientific circles to be adequate documentation for a reference. Let's discuss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jobberone (talk • contribs) 15:32, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

It's not neutral and it's original research without a citation. Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:13, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

There will never ever ever be a statement like this which is not an opinion. Say you look at all the polls ever conducted for who is the greatest Presidents ever. Well you could get a 100 liberal historians and 100 conservative historians with the best credentials in the world to rate them. It could be published in a real book or seen on TV as a documentary. It is still an opinion and would not be really neutral despite efforts to make it so. Abraham Lincoln and George Washington are considered by most everyone as the greatest Presidents. Not fact but enough people believe it most consider it fact. Ali and Lewis are considered two of the greatest boxers. Unitas on of the best QBs ever. America is considered the greatest military power ever. On and on. Personal communication is considered a legit source. Or referencing unpublished data. This is unpublished data. Jobberone (talk) 00:27, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

There are published articles which note the "greatness" of these Presidents. Unless there are published articles which note the "fineness" of Thorpe as an athlete, it is not allowed to stay per WP:OR. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:30, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Fine I met your criteria. It's all still an opinion including which are the greatest presidents or greatest whatever whenever. It's all an opinion no matter whether its in media or not or what media its in. Jobberone (talk) 02:57, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Please read WP:NPOV for why your statements are incorrect. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

You're kidding yourself. Unless something can be repeated consistently and recorded 'accurately' then there is no fact involved. Considering something as great is in itself by definition arbitrary and an opinion. Although you can assemble all the facts you want to support your case, in these instances, you are making arbitrary opinions. You cannot compare Presidents across timelines and varying circumstances or sports figures in different eras especially from totally different sports and arrive at a calculated and accurate result based on facts. They cannot be neutral although certainly people can try to be unbiased as humanly possible. While I agree there must be general guidelines to follow let's not deceive ourselves into believing following the letter of the law automatically begats neutral and unbiased findings. And there is not necessarily any lack of neutrality in forming opinions. There are thousands of statements in Wikipedia based on references from very biased authors who have managed to get their opinions in media. I've read the rules and I see no problem with making statements based on personal communication or unpublished data either which is well accepted in the scientific community. Even anecdotal evidence is admissible when attributed as such. BTW, I have a doctorate with six years of formal post-doctoral training, years of experience and have published. We certainly need to police Wikipedia properly but we do not need to have censorship under the guise of playing by the rules. Who decides what is neutral? Jobberone (talk) 03:29, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

tl;dr. I gather, however, that you failed to read the first sentence of the policy I linked, which says "Editing from a neutral point of view (NPOV) means representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources." Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:32, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

No I read it carefully. Where we disagree is I believe you are hiding behind a set of rules thinking you are protecting neutrality when what you are doing is providing censorship in its name. You are failing to observe what is generally considered a consensus which is a great part of the concept of neutrality. I have provided the statement in the article in a way that is completely within the guideline but its still an opinion. The matter is resolved as far as I'm concerned. Peace. Jobberone (talk) 03:46, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

BTW, I hated the Giants won the SB. Jobberone (talk) 03:48, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Same. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:51, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Jobberone, the citation you supplied only announced the contest to choose the greatest athlete of the 20th century. I have found and added a citation that actually gives the results of that contest. -- Donald Albury 12:22, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Xie xie! Jobberone (talk) 13:48, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

World Famous Indians Basketball

It's not entirely true that Thorpe's World Famous Indian teams - including basketball - were unknown until 2005 - perhaps it should say that "until 2005 most of Thorpe's biographers were unaware of Thorpe's basketball career." My father, Hap Moran often told stories of playing a few games with this team and after he died in 1994 I was in contact with Grace Thorpe, Jim's daughter, and through her with Robert Whitman, who wrote "Jim Thorpe and the Oorang Indians, the NFL's Most Colorful Franchise" in 1984. Whitman knew about the World Famous Indian Basketball team and referred me to the Marion County Historical Society which had a file of clippings on the team. I published an article in the newsletter of the Professional Football Researchers Association in 1999 that mentioned the team based on my father's stories and the material in the Marion Historical Society. Revmoran 00:12, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately for your recollections, material added to Wikipedia must be verifiable by being published in reliable sources. A newsletter of an association may well be challenged by some editors as not being 'published', or not being a 'reliable source'. -- Donald Albury 00:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Thorpe's image in his World Famous Indians basketball uniform was distributed to the press and available on postcards. Here is a detail. Would it be a good addition to the article? Revmoran 00:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I will (at a late date) add my support for Remorvan's arguments. Thorpes basketball activity is well known to sports authorities. Part of the problem is that PBS' History Dectives television sho did a story in 2006 (or 2005) where they research a basketball ticket bought on ebay. The trumped up the "Undiscovered nature" of Thorpe's basketball career when in fact it was well documented in newspapers from the 1920s. Stude62 02:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

It's already in the article using almost Moran's exact wording and backed up by a source. Quadzilla99 14:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Item moved from article

I have noved this statement, "That is why Steve O'Neal owns the record with his 98 yard punt," from the article page because the citation request ({{cn}}) was removed from it without any attempt to provide a citation. Per Wikipedia policies, this item may not be re-added to the article until and unless a citation to a reliable published source is provided. -- Donald Albury 00:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Featured Article Review

I have listed this article on the Featured Article Review page; see its entry here for my reasoning. Please help to improve the article if you can and to give your views on the article's FAR page. Thanks, --Miskwito 03:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Was he in a movie or not?

In the "later life" section, it says "Reportedly he had an uncredited cameo as an assistant sports coach in the Warner Brothers movie Jim Thorpe -- All-American (1951)," In the "legacy" section, it says "Thorpe was seen in some long shots in the film.". Which of these two is correct? If the second is right, shouldn't "reportedly" be removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.167.162.174 (talk) 15:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that the copncept of "cameo" includes the likely recognition of the person's face. If Thorpe only appeared in the background (and the fact that we're even debatinmg that much), it's definitely the wrong word to use. WHPratt (talk) 13:57, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Info removed in lieu of sources

I removed the following info in lieu of sources. As I found no references to it in either my extensive collection of football history books, The New York Times extensive archives, or online:

• "In 1923 Thorpe kicked what would be a record 99 yard punt. However, at this point in the history of the NFL such records were not kept. That is why Steve O'Neal owns the record with his 98 yard punt." Google results:[3] (four out of the fives are mirrors despite excluding Wikipedia and the third is a forum I believe) NYT archives:[4] In case you're wondering the dash makes no difference. Quadzilla99 11:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
  • "...while another poll elected him as the best football player over the same period." I removed this also, I have no idea who conducted this poll or what it was named. Quadzilla99 12:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC) re-inserted with source. Quadzilla99 13:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
    • I don't remember the exact wording but there was a sentence in there attributing his divorce from his wife to alcoholism. I removed it in lieu of a source. Quadzilla99 16:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

      • "In lieu of" means "instead of". You mean "for lack of". --Thnidu (talk) 03:50, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

      • "Some accounts suggest that Hiram Thorpe had five different wives and produced a total of 19 children, of which no fewer than eleven were with Vieux." Ditto. Quadzilla99 16:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
        • "Thorpe scored 4041.530 points, 400 points more than runner-up Ferdinand Bie of Norway." Ditto. Quadzilla99 17:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Opening

The second paragraph is awkwardly written. As part American Indian, I'm not overly concerned about political correctness, but the wording could be better. I'm taking a stab at it.

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 06:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Info Box Photo

My first visit to this page and I was shocked to see a photo of Thorpe sitting at a desk in street clothes as the primary photo. The info box should definitely have a photo of him in athletic garb from his competitive days, not sitting at a desk 30 years down the road.--Fizbin (talk) 18:17, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The problem is in finding images that can be used in Wikipedia. We are quite strict about copyright issues. Please read Wikipedia:Image use policy for more on what images can and cannot be used in Wikipedia. -- Donald Albury 19:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I understand that policy dictates not just any photo can be used in WP, but there are already three other photos in the article, any one of which would be much better for the info box.--Fizbin (talk) 22:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess I was moving too fast. Sorry for the flip answer. Which image whould prefer in the infobox? -- Donald Albury 23:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Being a track and field guy I'd go with the Olympic one, but the Canton football photo is a better quality print.--Fizbin (talk) 00:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I always preferred the Olympic one. It makes him look like some kind of superhero, which suits his achievements quite well! But then again, with two football pictures and one Olympic one, it makes most sense to use one of the football ones as the lead image. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{WIKIPROJECT ATHLETICS NEEDS YOU!} 17:36, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Jim Thorpe's father wasn't Irish....

That was just made up bullcrap information owing to the racism of the time period. Thorpe is in fact a descendant of Chief Joseph. The reason white ancestry was bullcrapped in there, was owing to his athletic prowess; in Thorpe's time there was much racism against the native americans, and owing to the poverty of most natives in this country, although in Thorpe's reservation there have been much protests regarding his ancestry, said reservation has been unable to retalliate legally. Regarding Thorpe's ancestry please revise it; certainly the man doesn't even look Irish. For god's sake he couldn't even grow a beard! Yes, that is important, because full blooded native americans can't grow beards, and the ability to grow a beard is something you inherit from your father. White father, native mother = boy who will grow a beard, however, native father + white mother = boy who will be beardless, or grow very little face hair. In a local reservation here where I reside, a lot of male descendants of native americans never have to shave; ever. As a race, the native americans are beardless (the males). The spanish had a term for the "condition;" in spanish, a man who can't grow a beard is referred to as a "lampiño," it literally means "bald face."

Thorpe, was never known to have worn a beard, so his paternal Irish ancestry is highly suspect. Part of the reason Islam, and even Judaism, have been accused of being false religions, is native american beardlessness; both Islam and Judaism, talk about the sacredness of the beard yeah well, what happens when a man can't even grow one? See, full blooded native americans, pose a problem; if Islam truly came from "God" you would think "God" would know that a race of men can't even grow beards wouldn't you? If there are any anti-muslims out there, the very existence of full blooded native americans, presents a powerful counter argument; how the hell can a man be like Mohamed, the prophet of Islam, if he can't grow a beard? The author of this article, please take the time to visit Thorpe's actual tribe, and not rely on white scholars. His paternal Irish ancestry is highly suspect, and the sources can not be trusted. The article needs revision.

67.148.120.105 (talk) 12:39, 14 December 2009 (UTC)stardingo747

It's because only the Irish settled the US; English, Germans, etc... not a single one has ever set foot on US soil. All people claim to be "Irish." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wōdenhelm (talk • contribs) 03:29, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Native Americans and Facial Hair

Sorry to disappoint the poster who ragged on about facial hair BUT as a Lakota myself we do have facial hair. I am a Lakota off the Rosebud Rez in South Dakota. It is just another stereotype that "Indians" don't have hair on there faces. I am so tired of reading once again this myth. Many, many tribes have men that have beards and are FBI, full blooded Indians, so get over it. So sad. 70.180.89.85 (talk) 18:29, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Poverty/Later career after sports

His poverty in later life is a bit over dramatized, like many in the depression he struggled to make a living but he did provide for his family. He was an extra in many Westerns, advocated and won equal pay for Native American extras in the industry. No mention at all is made of his lecture tours across the country, which he was quite well known for in the 30's and 40's. Some of his children are still living and should be consulted on this article which frankly has a lot of holes in it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chazran (talk • contribs) 03:35, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Correction to Thorpe article

I am an historian at the Army Military History Institute at Carlisle and also an expert on Army football history. This article incorrectly states that Dwight Eisenhower injured his kneee trying to tackle Thorpe in 1912. In fact Eisenhower hurt his knee in the next game against Tufts. - Conrad Crane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.99.8.10 (talk) 17:01, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done changed. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:11, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

That's not quite correct, from what I've read. Ike injured his right knee in the Carlisle game, when he and Leland Hobbs collided while trying to tackle Thorpe. Ike had to leave the game and did not return, and he wore a knee brace for the ensuing week. He aggravated the injury the next week in the game against Tufts, in the third quarter, when a Tufts defender twisted his leg. Even then he might have recovered except that the West Point riding master, who disliked him, made him participate in the "monkey drill" (jumping off a galloping horse.) That ripped up his knee so badly that Dr. Charles Keller, the WP surgeon, said later that he really should have medically discharged Ike, but didn't because he liked him. 67.176.61.216 (talk) 08:46, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Jim Thorpe's son Carl

http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/cpthorpe.htm - Carl Phillip Thorpe - Colonel Thorpe was the son of Jim Thorpe — Preceding unsigned comment added by JGlenwood (talk • contribs) 18:23, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. I've added a bit of information about him to the article. Graham87 03:27, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Name in opening line

Seeing as no birth certificate exists, should we use his official christening name (Jacobus Franciscus Thorpe) or the Anglicised "James Francis Thorpe" for which there is not an official registry source? SFB 07:52, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

FWIW, I don't really mind one way or the other, as long as the article and cited source are in agreement. Graham87 15:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Giants number

Pretty sure this shows him. He wore 21 that year. Cake (talk) 20:52, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Jim Thorpe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071114205622/http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com:80/2004/olympics/2004/08/08/bc.olympics.athletics.thorpe/ to http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/olympics/2004/08/08/bc.olympics.athletics.thorpe/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:51, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

The use of the word Today

This article uses the word "today" to explain the difference in "today's value" of the dollar versus 100 years ago dollar. It should cite a year instead of the word "today." 100 years from now, the value will be very different, and "today" will be 100 years out of date. I'm not an economist, everything I know about economics, I read on Wikipedia, so I'll leave the correction up to someone who knows what they are talking about.

Tothmetres (talk) 19:36, 16 January 2016 (UTC)tothmetres

edit: I thought that it might heolp to quote the exact section of the article needing attention:

" reportedly as little as US$2 ($51 today)"