Talk:Machine Gun Kelly (gangster)

Barnes?

I just removed the name Barnes... then put it back :S. The only mention of Barnes on the FBI page is that it was his fathers name, but I see no other evidence it was used, even in the court case against him(??). Then I found this link: http://www.crimelibrary.com/gangsters_outlaws/outlaws/kelly/2.html anyhow, I found it confusing, and feel it needs further explanation as to why he is mostly refered to as Machine Gun Kelly. Maybe move it into a description of his father similar to the FBI bio Dwxyzq 22:33, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

The article says:

To protect his family and escape law enforcement officers, he changed his name to George R. Kelly.

But looking back at the first sentence, we see that he was born as "George R. Kelly"

I have not researched this enough to know what his name was at birth, but if his name was other than George R. Kelly at birth, the article should say that, even if it was only his name for a day, and even if no one ever called him that.

Maybe we could say something like

George R. Kelly, born as George Kelly Barnes, aka George "Machine Gun" Kelly Barnes (July 18, 1895 - July 18, 1954) was a notorious American gangster during the prohibition era. ... (or whatever his name was at birth)

--VegKilla 22:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Well it looks like the contradiction has been cleared up. I am still not sure why the part that talks about his name at birth is not in the first sentence, since that seems to be the standard for Wikipedia biographies, but he was never famous by his birth name so it is fine the way it is. I added "citation needed" to the part that talks about him changing his name, since it would be nice to be able to look at the source and see when he changed his name, and how we know it was to protect his family name, but that is minor.—Preceding unsigned comment added by VegKilla (talk • contribs) 04:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

--[User:StarWolf|StarWolf]] 07:18, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

If he changed his name to George R. Kelly why does his tombstone say George B. Kelly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.23.212.21 (talk) 07:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Nickname

There is an obvious omission from this article: how did he get his nickname? Sure, the reader can assume the obvious - that he used machine guns in his crimes - but it would be much better to have some details in the article. Does anyone have any info on this? -- Hux 21:01, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

-- Did they give him life imprissonment just for kidnapping? how many murders does he have? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.235.225.76 (talk) 21:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Marriage

"The couple were married..." What couple? This section should be expanded or deleted. Otherise it's pretty pointless. NickQ 21:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Someone should remove the line that his wife was an "elepfant".—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.221.23 (talk) 14:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, it says "Shortly thereafter, Kelly married Kathryn Thorne...". But he was already married to Geneva. So was there a divorce that is not mentioned here, or was this second 'marriage' a bigamous one? T-bonham (talk) 05:02, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Significance

The article states, "Most historians agree that it marked the end of the gangster era in America." What is it? The preceding sentences talk of the kidnapping of Urschel and the two trials. Sounds like the sentence should read "they" instead of "it." Perhaps, most historians would agree that the gangster era ended in America with the death of John Dillinger in July of 1934. L. Thomas W. (talk) 17:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC) L. Thomas W.

Disputed

Some information was disputed via m:OTRS Ticket:2009050510074752. I've asked the person to either edit the article, or to let me remove all the unsourced challenged info. -- Jeandré, 2009-05-06t11:58z

Ransom?

The article includes the sentence

At the time it was the largest ransom ever paid in the United States

but nowhere else is a ransom mentioned. I presume the ransom concerns Kelly's kidnapping of Urschel and Jarrett, but there's no mention of the result of that kidnapping other than Kelly being captured after "56 days on the run". What actually happened? -- Dan Griscom (talk) 20:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was page not moved. —harej (talk) (cool!) 20:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

---

Machine Gun Kelly → George "Machine Gun" Kelly — per all 4 <ref>s - all use multiple variations, but George "Machine Gun" Kelly is used by all and (apart from simply "Kelly") is the most frequently used name. 58.8.209.249 (talk) 16:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC) Oppose. Current title is the overwhelming common name. The particular references used in the article notwithstanding, they are exceptions to the rule. 1,750 news results for current vs. 21 for RM target (an approximate 83:1 ratio in favor of the current title). Similar results are found in other media. Books: 701 vs. 53 (13:1 ratio favoring current title); Web: 82,900 vs. 866 (95:1 ratio favoring current title).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:21, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I think some of those searches are broken - looks like you've stipulated that pages must include the phrase "george machine gun" but must also exclude the word "kelly".

Here's two I tried:

• Google : "george kelly" "machine gun kelly" -"george machine gun kelly" = 193 hits
• Google : "george kelly" "george machine gun kelly" = 398 hits

58.8.10.227 (talk) 16:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, you are absolutely correct. The trailing kelly works as an excluder. However. using <george-"Machine Gun"> removes the problem and still shows substantial results in favor of "machine gun kelly". The ratios for news, for example., is still 491 verses 1750 (a 3.5:1 ratio) and for web, it's 9.3:1.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:49, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

A lot of the results you're getting are not direct references to the person in question.

Do you see any problem with the two examples I've given? 58.8.10.227 (talk) 17:24, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes the problem is that both searches require "george kelly" to appear on the page, so it excludes all pages having just machine gun kelly, but not george, meaning it has no value to find pages which just use "machine gun kelly" but not george (which is the point). So the only proper search is one that excludes george. Let's use a third targeted term that should act to remove false positives such as "prohibition". Google ignores quotes marks in its results (but of course not in its search parameters) so we can simply use "george machine gun" for the proposed move target. If you think about it, this type of search actually results in a vast benefit of the doubt toward the move target because every page that contains all the terms—even those that might say "better/popularly known as 'machine gun kelly'" are excluded, which can only lower the results for the current name while having no affect on the results for the move target, and yet the results are still higher for "machine gun kelly":

News, books and web results, respectively, for: <"george machine gun" prohibition> (supporting the move target):43, 103 and 923

News, books and web results, respectively, for: <"machine gun kelly" -george prohibition> (supporting the current name) 56, 142 and 1,200.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:39, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Well at least the ratios are within the realms of plausability - but I'm no nearer to agreeing. A big part of the conundrum is that George "Machine Gun" Kelly clearly isn't a simple four-word name that can be compared directly with Machine Gun Kelly and George Kelly. Consider Robert John "Mutt" Lange - also clearly not a simple four-word name, it's a 2-in-1 reference to two names - Robert John Lange and Mutt Lange. I think the same should apply here. 58.8.10.182 (talk) 07:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose. I don't see anything in WP:NAMEPEOPLE recommending use of FIRST "NICK" LAST at all--not as a general practice and not even as a disambiguation scheme. However, use of his popular nickname Machine Gun Kelly is an easy way to disambiguate this person's page from other people named George Kelly. I would not oppose George Kelly (Machine Gun Kelly). DMacks (talk) 19:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Spelling of wife's name?

Throughout the article, his wife's name is spelled "Kathryn". In the biography box, it is spelled "Katherine". Which is correct? Tmagsadie (talk) 11:52, 5 June 2010 (UTC)tmag

Earned?

His most famous crime was the kidnapping of oil tycoon & businessman Charles Urschel in July 1933 for which he, and his gang, earned $200,000 in ransom. Earned seems like the wrong word used to describe the receipt of money from a kidnapping. Words referring to theft (stole, took) also seem wrong. "Received" seems best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.98.244.95 (talk) 17:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Kelly?

Okay, just wanted to know, the article states his name came from his favorite weapon, the Thompson machine gun, but where in the world does the "Kelly" part come from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Second Skin (talk • contribs) 05:32, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

@Second Skin I'm still wondering where the Kelly part comes from Kelly 23123 (talk) 08:27, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Descendants

Family lives in Nevada, like in Mesquite, Las Vegas, Pahrump, etc., and some in Hawaii. Original research, so don't cite it nor add it to article. Find and contact the members if you want. Two of 'em are dead-ringing clones of Machine Gun Kelly. 70.180.188.238 (talk) 14:23, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

DOB issue

Please have a look at this and either revert or clarify that we cannot say for sure when he was born (in accordance with cited sources). Other Wikipedias (de, ru) have 1895 as his DOB.    FDMS  4    20:56, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Historian and Author Micheal Esslinger has DOB as 1895. His research for the book Alcatraz A Definitive History came from National Archives.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.83.47.253 (talk) 16:37, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

July 17,1900 appears as Kelly's birthdate on his World War I draft registration card, filled out in September 1918, and is the date provided by Kelly’s son, Bruce Barnes, in his book Machine Gun Kelly: To Right a Wrong, published in 1991 KMeredithHistory (talk) 17:08, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Businessman?

The biog in the sidebar describes his occupations as “Gangster, bootlegger and businessman”… Businessman? Did he ever have any sort of business (other than crime), and if so, if it is significant enough to get a mention in the box, shouldn’t it be in the article? To be honest, it makes him sound like the local gangsters on The Simpsons, who are satirically styled as “independent businessmen”. Jock123 (talk) 08:33, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Machine Gun Kelly (musician) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:02, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest statement

I am the author of a book entitled Under Penalty of Death: The Untold Story of Machine Gun Kelly's First Kidnapping, to be published in May 2023 by Red Lightning Books, an imprint of Indiana University Press. I will benefit financially from the sale of this book. Drawing on research conducted for the book, I made several substantial changes to the Machine Gun Kelly page on April 12, 2023, adding what I feel is historically imperative and thoroughly documented information about Kelly's kidnapping of Howard Woolverton in January 1932. I would like to continue to correct, add to and create Wikipedia articles about this crime, placing notices like this in each article's talk section. But any guidance on the best way to proceed is welcome. KMeredithHistory (talk) 17:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 30 May 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. The question isn't "is the musician PRIMARY", it's "is the musician's notability such that the gangster is no longer PRIMARY?" The answer to the question, from the discussion, is "yes". (closed by non-admin page mover) Sceptre (talk) 23:50, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

---

• Machine Gun Kelly → Machine Gun Kelly (gangster)
• Machine Gun Kelly (disambiguation) → Machine Gun Kelly

– Because of the musician, I don't think the gangster is the main thing that people are looking for with the the name "Machine Gun Kelly" 90.255.15.152 (talk) 12:08, 30 May 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:01, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support the musician has more views (117,574) than the gangster (30,436)[[1]]. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:26, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. The gangster is far and away the primary topic in terms of long-term significance. He's been the subject of books and films. The musician is a case of WP:RECENTISM who may well be well-known to fans of his music genres, but does not have anything like the universal significance of the gangster from whom he appropriated his name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:34, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

  Then why does MGK redirect to the musician 90.255.15.152 (talk) 13:59, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

  Because the gangster is never known as MGK! -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:59, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

  Proof??? 90.255.15.152 (talk) 17:03, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

• Support per Swale, The musician is quite clearly the primarytopic here, Not even debatable tbh. –Davey2010^Talk 14:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
  • What, because he has more pageviews? That's not how primary topics work on Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:59, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

    That's funny because according to WP:DPT that's exactly how it works. The pageviews here tells us all we need to know. –Davey2010^Talk 15:05, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

    Sorry, but that's not exactly how it works, per WP:PT2. On the other hand, this isn't a proposal to move the musician's article to primary topic status. It's merely to disambiguate the term. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:50, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

    We'll agree to disagree on that, I had misread the rm so have struck that part out, –Davey2010^Talk 16:15, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. You gotta be kidding. WP:PT2 162 etc. (talk) 14:53, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

  Then why does MGK redirect to the musician 90.255.15.152 (talk) 17:03, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

  MGK could refer to anything ... the association is a red herring. Steel1943 (talk) 19:25, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

• Support. The musician, though they obviously took their name after the gangster, has established such a level of notability that there currently is no primary topic, and the odds of the musician's notability diminishing anytime soon are next to nil. Steel1943 (talk) 19:25, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose, primary topic per usage & long-term significance vs. recentism. Walrasiad (talk) 22:28, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nom, Swale and Steel1943. This isn't a proposal to move the musician's article to primary topic status. It's merely to disambiguate the term. As I said in my (unsuccessful) RM rationale at Talk:Straight Outta Compton#Requested move 1 April 2021, "it seems hard to continue claiming that readers are almost certain to be seeking information about the [gangster] when the pageview statistics clearly show they are more than twice as likely to be looking for the [musician]." This phenomenon has persisted for this topic for about a decade, so it is not just a blip. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 13:26, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per Necrothesp; the primary topic is the Depression-era gun-toting gangster. -- 64.229.90.172 (talk) 23:21, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
  • And "MGK" is a completely separate issue unrelated to this topic, as it is a completely different spelling, so does not mean anything in the relation to this discussion; same as how any other three-letter acronym is dealt separately from all the possibel expansions of that abbreviation. -- 64.229.90.172 (talk) 23:21, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
• Courtesy link to Machine Gun Kelly (musician). I have no real opinion here otherwise. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 03:24, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support. The musician has been notable for over 10 years, so it's hard to argue recentism. Per pageviews, it seems pretty clear there isn't a PTOPIC. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 13:01, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support: WP:PT2 here is a good claim against moving the musician to the undisambiguated name, but that isn't being requested here. With a pageview gap like what we see here, WP:PT1 comes into play, and it's clear that the primary topic criteria are at least split, meaning there is no primary topic and we should disambiguate. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:46, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
• Relister comment: Relisting in hopes that further discussion will lead to a consensus in either direction. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:01, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nom, no PRIMARY.--Ortizesp (talk) 21:38, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nomination; Crouch, Swale; Davey2010; Steel1943; BarrelProof; CLYDE; Skarmory and Ortizesp. Although, in 2014, I nominated Kelly's contemporary Legs Diamond for a move to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and primary name (Jack Diamond (gangster) → Legs Diamond) at Talk:Legs Diamond#Requested move, there is no strong competition for the name at Legs Diamond (disambiguation). The competition, however, at Machine Gun Kelly (disambiguation) is much stronger, thus pointing towards WP:NOPRIMARY. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 23:57, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Support. The musician has been notable for long enough that I don't believe it's a case of recentism. If he fades into obscurity in 10 years, maybe revisit this, but for now I think a disambiguation page is appropriate. WPscatter ^t/_c 06:10, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support per pageviews. The musician has been popular for a long time now so I am not sure about the recentism arguments.--NØ 14:20, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support: I can understand the oppose votes based on historical significance, but I could also see people trying to look up the musician and being astonished to get to an article about a difference person. I think a disambiguation page is more appropriate to better accommodate readers looking for information on either individual. Aoba47 (talk) 14:25, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support With the singer also being a celebrity for a while, it's hard to say there is a clear primary topic, either by views or long-term significance, though obviously the singer could never be primary topic. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:01, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.