Talk:Annie Oakley/Archive 1

Archive 1

Sharpshooter

The sharpshooter link goes to a wrestling article...Hmm... [ 72.128.209.240 17:30, 29 April 2006 (UTC) [[1] ]

It doesn't at the moment --Cjrother 20:03, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

U.S. American

I recently changed U.S American to American but it has been changed back. I don't particularly mind being reverted but I have never heard anyone referred to as a "U.S American" before. Is this a real term? --Cjrother 20:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

"U.S. American" is an NPOV demonym phrase meaning 'United States citizen of the American continents'. Another phrase could be used, but just "American" is POV. • Annie Oakley was a first-female superstar relating to women, sports, entertainment, and guns, and is therefore of widespread cross-cultural interest outside of the United States. Wikipedia articles can get mistranslated — Oakley's unambiguous national citizenship deserves to be formally identified. • English Wikipedia is a global encyclopedia to be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV). The continentally-offending USA colloquial use of American as a demonym for citizens of the United States of America, has long been resented (since at least 1947) by many citizens of the 30-some[2] other countries on/near the two continents of the Americas. On 2006-05-19 Eduardo Galeano of Uruguay, one of Latin America’s most acclaimed writers said, "The name “America” has been kidnapped by the United States. Really, we are part of America, no?" [3] Milo 07:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The US also "kidnapped" much of the land of North America. But guess what, it's pretty well entrenched there now so might as well accept reality. Every "US American's" biography uses "American". Don't drag a nice noncontroversial article like this into a political fight. [ 69.227.95.111 07:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC) continued at § Recent changes may be plagiarism [or not] ]

[69.227.95.111's 2006-06-29 02:30:45 Edit Summary of rv to "American"] "("American" is standard english usage. whether or not anyone resents that. Wikipedia is not a soapbox.)"

The United States government, by treaty omission, does not confirm your stated position. "American" is colloquial English usage as evidenced by its failure to appear as a U.S. demonym in the North American Free Trade Agreement[4]. ≈ Soapbox? WP:NPOV always trumps a WP:Soapbox claim; but ok, lets follow policy 1 at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes - Avoidance. The simple way to avoid this dispute is to use a phrase without "American" in it, the most obvious choices being "United States sharpshooter", or "U.S. sharpshooter". Milo 10:10, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

That does not resolve the dispute since it obviously implies "American" does not already refer to the US, which is the whole dispute. Fact is it is overwhelmingly used to refer to the United States way on the wikipedia [5], clearly demonstrating the majority view. NPOV is not meant to give equal weight to extreme minority views. Further, whichever version of American you prefer, it still works, since Oakley indeed lived in North America. Anyway I linked it to United States just for you.

And it most definately is official. Its official use dates back to the founding fathers, who clearly appropriated it, but it caught on. And the world is how it is, not how we want it to be. South Americans who learn english are going to have to figure out what "American" means in english, whether or not it gets hidden from them on the Annie Oakley wikipedia page. 69.227.95.111 21:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

To my request for WP:Avoidance, I took your answer (or OT lack thereof) under advisement. My advisor believes that (1) on balance that your answer is nationalistic rather than encyclopedic, (2) your answer seeks to expand gratuitous struggle rather than focusing compromise toward closure, (3) Talk:Annie Oakley is not the place to duplicate the lengthy debate at Talk:Use of the word American, and eventually (4) you will become a good NPOV encyclopedist, or you will tire of encyclopedia neutrality and leave, or you will be banned, perhaps for persistent NPOV policy violations. Whether or not that analysis is correct to a quibble, its gist is persuasive, so I have decided to unilaterally implement WP policy 3.6: Wikipedia:Resolving disputes: STOP - Disengage for a while Milo 08:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Here's a nice official source: [6]. Also the Encyclopedia Brittanica calls her an "American Markswoman": [7]. What is neutrality if not deference to good sources? 69.227.95.111 11:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

---

Note: 69.227.95.111 (talk • contribs) appears to have changed IP to 64.163.4.225 (talk • contribs)

Exhibition shooting

I'm gearing up to write an article in Ed McGivern, as I just bought a modern reprint of his 1938 "Fast and Fancy Revolver Shooting". McGivern was a marksman, exhibition shooter, researcher, and firearms trainer who had quite a significant impact in the early 1900s. One of the steps in preparing the McGivern article was to create an article on exhibition shooting, and in it I mention Annie Oakly. Since she earned her living doing trick shooting, I think "exhibition shooter" is probably a more accurate desciption of her career than "marksman", though she certainly was one, and I've added a link to the introductary paragraph. If anyone wants to dig up a list of some tricks she did and stick it in the exhibition shooting article, I think that would be a valuable addition. scot 20:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Happily married? Elderly father?

My mom wrote a paper on Annie Oakley a while ago. She contests that the marriage wasn't fititng of 'happily'.

War of 1812: 1812. Annie born: 1860. Gestation period of 48 years? [ Qe2eqe 19:10, 21 Nov 2006 (UTC) [8] ]

"marriage wasn't fititng of 'happily'" Pardon, does the "fititng" typo mean "fitting a description"? Can you ask your mom the name of the book or other source that reported that? Keep in mind that Annie was the first U.S. American female superstar, and that tabloid papers routinely print rumors about the private lives of stars that aren't true.

"1812. Annie born: 1860"The article only says "Her father fought in the War of 1812...". If he was a soldier at roughly age 20, Annie would have been born when he was 68. That does seem quite old when he had two more children yet to father. Another reader has asked previously in § "Annie Oakley's father's military service" why was he fighting in a war if he was a Quaker? Could you ask your mom about that, too? Milo 06:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

This page contains plagirism

When searching Google for Annie Oakley I came upon this site [9] the wiki article contain some if not all of the same info word for word. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.207.117.147 (talk) 02:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

PRINCE

Hey, I have a project due on Annie Oakleys horse, "Prince". Thing is, I can't find any information about him except that he is a "tall, handsome bay". Would anyone mind helping me out here? I'd really appreciate it... [ Meggo 01:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC) [10] ]

The first questions to ask about any statement made about Annie Oakley is "Who said so?" and "Now is that really true?".

I did a quick Google search and several "Annie Oakley's horse" names popped up, "Prince" only once. But she may have had several horses. Or those might have been imaginary horses mentioned in Annie Oakley fiction.

I suggest trying the Google book search feature at the top of this page.

How big a project? How much can you really say about a horse? It could take time to search all the indexes of many Oakley books in a big library, and you still might not find enough for a project without reading a bunch of 19th century newspaper accounts of her act.

Don't forget to sign your posts by using four tildes, like --> ~~~~. Milo 07:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Grandson Jacob?

Born in 1997? That is VERY hard to believe .... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.165.180.232 (talk) 01:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, especially since Annie and Frank didn't have children.

I've deleted this edit test of Wikipedia. Milo 02:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Siblings

So just what are her siblings' names? And which one has a different father, John or Hulda? Clarityfiend (talk) 02:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

By a probable list of dates, Jacob and Susan had 8 children including John and Hulda. Susan's 9th child was Emily, whose father was Daniel, Susan's second husband.

Here's a list mostly based on Annie's Family outlined by Toni Seiler, former director of the Garst Museum. I've added dates for Emily Brumbaugh and noted some of the name changes.

• Jacob MOSEY and Susan WISE, m. 1848

1. Mary Jane MOSEY b: 22 Apr 1851 (grave age), Hollidaysburg, Blair Co., PA

2. Lydia MOSEY b: 6 AUG 1852 in Hollidaysburg, Blair Co., PA

3. Elizabeth MOSEY b: 5 APR 1855 (grave age), Hollidaysburg, Blair Co., PA

4. Sarah Ellen MOSEY b: 4 Apr 1857 in Darke Co., OH

5. Catherine MOSEY b: 17 Mar 1859 in Darke Co., OH

6. Phoebe Ann MOSEY (aka "Annie OAKLEY") b: 13 Aug 1860, Woodland, Darke Co., OH

7. John Henry MOSEY (aka "MOSES" according to AOF) b: 8 Aug 1862, Darke Co., OH

8. Hulda Marie MOSEY (aka "MOSES" according to AOF) b: 19 Dec 1864, Darke Co., OH

Note: "Annie Oakley" family 1860 census does not list Catherine b. 1859.

• Daniel BRUMBAUGH and Susan WISE, m. aft 1866

1. Emily BRUMBAUGH b. 02 May 1869, (prob. Darke Co., OH), d. 29 Jun 1927 (www.familysearch.org)

• Joseph SHAW and Susan WISE, m. aft 1868

(no issue)

Why, according to AOF, John and Hulda changed their names to MOSES before their sequential marriage ceremonies isn't clear, nor is why Hulda would need to, if taking on her husband's name (Stephen SHANER). Milo 07:16, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Then I guess I'll have to mosey on down to the article and correct myself. Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:29, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Inconsistent age descriptions

One part says ...eight or nine years old, she was put in the care of the superintendent of the county poor farm,... and When she reunited with her family at age 13 or 14, Annie began hunting at age nine to support her siblings and her widowed mother. If she were actually living in slavery like circumstances at the superintendent's farm, how did she find the time to go hunting and sell her catch? S.o. needs to explain this or find an explanation for how this all fits together. --76.97.245.5 (talk) 05:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that too. The "eight or nine" and "13 or 14" I sourced from the Annie Oakley - Dorchester Library biography. Dorchester has a marriage date known wrong, so they can't be assumed as correct. The "hunting at age nine" wasn't my contribution and it doesn't have a source, but she had to start at some age. Maybe she started hunting at nine-ish, but not for money until 13 or 14? Annie Oakley's autobiography would be a start on sorting this out.

The slavery occurred when she was "rented out" from the poor farm, not at it; see Dorchester. Milo 07:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Cheating [or not]

Now I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade, but I remember seeing a documentary a while back that claimed Annie had used Shotgun style bullets (shot packed into wax in a .22 rifle bullet) to achieve her amazing results with the playing card trick. Is this true and does anyone know more about this? Basmandude 09:40, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, but if not yet another legend, it's no problem. It would improve the article if you can find a reliable source for that story. Was it in the PBS documentary, Spring 2006?

Do you think of Houdini as a cheater because he hid lockpicks on his body before he was lowered into a tank of water, in chains, upside down? Buffalo Bill's Wild West was a show where Annie performed as an exhibition shooter, not as a sports competitor. Both examples are showmanship, not cheating. Also, the many more people in Annie's era with a knowlege of guns knew what a .22 caliber hole looked like versus a shotgun pellet hole. It couldn't have been much of a secret if those cards were passed out as souvineers (were they?). A public domain picture of an "Annie Oakley" playing card with ruler marks overlaid on it would make it obvious to Wikipedia readers, too. Milo 09:01, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Update: No, the shotgun bullets claim wasn't in the PBS American Experience rerun broadcast on 2006-11-15. That show did mention that Annie was originally considered a shotgun sharpshooter, though later she competed at Wimbledon with a rifle to best her rival — rifle champion Lillian Smith. Milo 06:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Apologies for the non NPOV heading, didn't mean to stir anything up, just remembered it from a TV show (poss BBC, as UK based will look for it when I get some time). I would agree that it would be showmanship, much as magic tricks etc are. Basmandude 15:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

"HI"I am Carmen why did she get famus just for doing all that stuf when eny one can put thair mind to it? (Moved from subpage intended for comments about biography project article rating)

At 90 feet, "Oakley could split a playing card edge-on and put five or six more holes in it before it touched the ground."

This may sound great but it is not believable for several reasons:

1. I understand that the height is not specified but, no one, and I mean no one, could shoot accurately enough to hit a fluttering piece of a playing card at 90 feet five or six times as it fell to the ground.

I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here--most exhibition tricks are really easier than they look. Splitting a playing card at 90 feet requires a good shot and an accurate rifle, and even then it's unlikely that you'll get a clean split. High speed photos of splitting a card show the bullet deflecting and cutting only part of the way through the card, so you'll still have a whole card to shoot at. Dropping a card, especially a torn and bent one, from 6 feet causes it to tumble, taking about 2 seconds in most cases (this is personal observation, done right here with a similar sized bit of card stock) and, if spinning along its length, it follows a fairly smooth path down. Even edge on, a card will take .61 seconds to fall 6 feet (h = .5 * a * t^2).

2. Assuming for the sake of argument that the piece of playing card fell six feet, few persons would be able to get off five or six shots before it hit the ground. I'm going on memory but the famous trick shooter and marksman, Ed McGivern, set a generally accepted record when he drew a revolver and fired five or six shots into an area the size of a playing card in about 2/5th of a second, but that was at a distance of only 15 feet.

Ed McGivern's record of 5 shots in .45 seconds (the stopwatches he used had a 0.05 second resolution, so it's generally rounded to worst case time) still stands, even the current world's fastest revolver shooter, Jerry Miculek, is 25% slower (at .57 seconds for 5 shots). A lever action or pump action rifle, which Oakley would most likely have been using, is going to be quite a bit slower than that, but 3 shots per second seems like a reasonable rate. Certainly a good shotgunner can get off 3 aimed shots a second with a heavy recoiling 12 gauge.

3. McGivern was able to fire that many shots that quickly because he used the technique called fanning, repeatedly drawing the palm of his free hand accross the hammer of the revolver. This is not technique that lends itself to accuracy outside of a few yards distance.

No, McGivern's book Fast and Fancy Revolver Shooting quite extensively documents that shooting a double action revolver is faster than even fanning a single action revolver when any accuracy is required. His 5 shot record was most certainly shot with a 5 shot .38 Special S&W DA revolver; let me track down the book and I can probably document the model number. The book also has a lot of how-to information on exhibition shooting, as the name implies.

Oakley undoubtedly was an unusually expert and accurate shooter but to uncritically accept the feats such as the one noted at the outset of my comments undercuts the credibility of Wikipedia.

That's the wrong approach; the statement is verifiable, and that's what matters here. The way to approach this is to either note the potential unreliability of the source (with a valid statement like "popular accounts state that...") or find other sources that question the claims. I would, however, be interesting to see what Mythbusters would do with this one... scot 04:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I've been reading dozens of sources and many contradict each other. From what I can determine Oakley used mainly shotguns and until she went to London was not considered a sharpshooter with a rifle. She did cut a playing card in half held sideways but that was all. The multiple shots through the playing card were while Butler was holding it facing her. The rifles she used were lever actions and it wasn't until late in her career that she used pump action weapons. I found a video (from a Brady film) of her demonstrating accurate rapid shooting with a rifle.....the targets looked like standard clay pidgeons hanging on nails which were maybe 15 feet from her. She was fast but no more than a couple of shots per second. I found a lot of references to the fact that both her and Butler exagerated her abilities (as did every contemporary book about her) every chance they got so that may be where the card trick came from. Wayne 19:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

"She did cut a playing card in half held sideways but that was all. The multiple shots through the playing card were while Butler was holding it facing her." Sounds like this mystery is resolving into facts. Can you document this with quotes from a reliable source, including publishing data? Milo 07:13, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Mikeasr 02:20, 29 May 2007 (UTC)mikeasrMikeasr 02:20, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

The article's source, reportedly Annie Oakley of the Wild West by Walter Havighurst (1954) described it as "add five or six more holes as it fluttered to the ground", according to an indirect quote at www.girlswithguns.org.

Basmandude's report on the UK documentary has suggested an answer to your article issue: like Houdini's acts, it could have been a show trick — done with shotgun pellets. Unfortunately, as yet Basmandude has provided no reliable source.

Wikipedia's standard is verifiability, not truth. While I agree with your analysis, it seems to be your original research. Can you back it up with a reliable source?

As for credibility, there is little to undercut. Wikipedia has been determined to lack academic credibility for anything but background information. See Several US universities ban Wikipedia as primary source - Wikinews. Milo 09:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I know it's been ages, but I couldn't find any RS, looks like some debate started up though! Cheers all, it's a good article Basmandude (talk) 15:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

There was a documenatary on TV tonight about Annie. It mentioned the playing card shot in half but not the multiple shots. The shooting feat they made out as the most incredible was hitting 6 targets thrown into the air at the same time (using 3 shotguns). It made the point that Annie never used a rifle in her act until beating Lillian Smith at Wimbledon (it mentioned no one knew she was good with a rifle). The docco also covered much that is not in the article, ie: B Bill rejecting her when she applied for a job the first time, the controversy over her quitting the show, the reason she took over from her husband at the beginning of her career (different from what the article says) etc etc. Also some of the article seems out of date sequence (events happening in different order than the article claims). The docco seems credible as it is narrated by several very reputable historians including one who specialises in Oakley and others like her (Scharff). Wayne 16:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Moved

This is an unreferenced anecdote:
"The story of how Annie began hunting is said, ironically, to be rather inauspicious; in the first place, when first she loaded her father's rifle to use it for shooting small game, she supposedly charged it with a little too much of the black powder that firearms of the time are known to have used. (Her father had apparently said that he had always aimed for the eyes of the small game animals, in order not to spoil the meat.) In the second, when Annie actually fired the rifle for the first time, she supposedly held it loosely enough for the recoil to make the butt of the rifle bang her nose, even though the one round she fired is said to have actually struck the squirrel for which she was said to have been aiming directly in the eye as she had apparently intended. Like so many other stories about Annie's sharpshooting, this one too is of doubtful authenticity."

It doesn't seem to belong in the article. Milo 05:08, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

2006 TV show errors

I object to this new reference: [11]. This edit contains the mythology error in which Annie's birth surname is misspelled ending in "s". The Annie Oakley Foundation (AOF) has definitively determined that Annie's birth surname ends in "y". See current reference 2: "We Hope "Mosey" Ends the Debate". annieoakleyfoundation.org. Summer 2003. http://www.annieoakleyfoundation.org/aim.html."

This edit also misleadingly refers to "fifth of seven surviving children", which is not useful as a reference to Annie being the sixth-born of Susan's total of nine children. See Talk:Annie_Oakley#Siblings above.

The 2006 AE program contains myths, including an incorrect fall season and Annie's incorrect teen age during the shooting match with Frank, and an incorrect origin of the "Oakley" stage name that AOF has denied. The AE web page isn't even consistent with the program. The AE program mentions Annie's spinal injuries and surgery following the 1901 train crash. The AE timeline web page says she wasn't injured.
In general, this highlights the risks of using the 2006 PBS American Experience Annie Oakley biography, or its web page, as unvetted sources. That's why there is a warning on the external link at the bottom of the article. Of course, many Oakley biographies contain errors (including the Dorchester Library page also warned about), but PBS reaches a much larger audience and the AE program was rerun again this and next week. Milo 05:08, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Annie Oakley Foundation

If all the reliable sources conflict, why are we assuming the AOF is the only correct one? When reliable sources conflict, it is best to include all of them and explain why one is more likely to be correct than another in the text. Assuming one is always correct over the others, is not the correct thing to do. I don't think anyone has a monopoly on reliability. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 06:01, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

There's a qualitative difference between controversy and copycat myth errors in simple facts like names and dates. No constituency is served by blindly repeating known simple mistakes. Sources about errors also trump sources that simply contain errors.

AOF is the only source I've seen so far that has researched the "s"-ending and "ee"-ending name myths. AOF's conclusion for Annie's correct surname spelling with a "y" is based on primary sources that are also stated and referenced in the article: "Her family's surname, "Mosey", ending in "y", appears on her father's gravestone Jacob Mosey - FindAGrave.com and in his military record;" The source of the "s"-ending myth is also implied in current footnote 4 by AOF's research into the "s"-ending name change by her brother and sister at their marriages. See Talk:Annie_Oakley#Siblings above. Milo 08:47, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Annie Oakley

I agree with everything thisi article says. I've done my research and it all adds up. Wikipedia has the best info about Annie Oakley. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Princess lydiax (talk • contribs) 00:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Representations on stage and screen

Representations on stage and screen... I disagree with the tag it received. I think it is in the right order and should stay that way. Unless you want to confuse people. Popularity shouldn't outrank the actual order of when or how things happen. Ariyen (talk) 22:23, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Possible source for information on Butler

I removed the following external link which was hanging around in the references section. It is unclear what text this source supports since no proper citation was used. However, it could be a source for this article so I did not want to lose it altogether. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/biography/oakley-butler/ WTucker (talk) 04:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

It looks like this source was used for a direct quotation which was unattributed and it is the source for a few other items in the article that are cited. I have fixed the attribution of the quote. WTucker (talk) 04:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

death

The PBS American Experience episode on Annie Oakley suggests that she might have died of lead poisoning, from having handled so much ammunition. (No evidence is given.) It also claims that Frank Butler was ill at the same time, and says nothing about his not eating. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 11:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Reasons for her fame

The only reasons I can find in the article for Annie's fame as a shooter is her card trick and the (possibly apocryphal - see above) story of her shooting the ash off the Kaiser's cigarette. There has to be something more in the text to explain why she was so famous. I'll try to find out. Myrvin (talk) 14:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Recent changes may be plagiarism [or not]

Recent large additions added in early May 2006 are suspiciously similar to the content of PBS' recent American Experience episode about Annie Oakley. [ Gerrymurphy 11:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC) [12] ]

• And this would be odd because? Unless text has been taken verbaitm from the program, or the website, we must first assume good faith. Denni ☯ 17:28, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

• If you are concerned about a significant word-for-word copying which might be a copyright violation, perhaps you could point it out? ≈ Similar is ok, because there is only one set of facts. Perhaps you misunderstand plagiarism <-- read the Wikipedia article. Plagiarism includes falsely claiming originality, and Wikipedia doesn't claim originality. I think another editor did insert facts from the PBS American Experience episode web page cited in the External links, which is ok except that I had to re-correct and explain a PBS wrong fact or two, such as the 'Thanksgiving of 1875' myth. Milo 20:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

And why are you so sure of that defunct "Annie Oakley Foundation" page's accuracy over pbs? 69.227.95.111 07:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC) [refactor moved from § U.S. American]

Oakley birthdate/redate arithmetic as explained in the article. Milo 10:10, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Verbatim would be the remark about Annie being 'the first American woman superstar",a quote from American Experience narrator Laura Linney. I was planning on watching the show, but that remark totally put me off, since it is an OPINION; being an opinion, the same thing could be stated about Lillian Russell, and be more accurate, when you consider when and how long Lillian was in show business, as compared to Annie. I did a quick comparison, and when Annie was just starting out in 1885 with Buffalo Bill, Lillian was already being lauded in the media beginning about 1879-1880. Lillian Russell was a media sensation in more than her own right, going so far as to be sent to Europe on a fact-finding mission for the president after WWI. I would consider Lillian Russell being the first American woman superstar, not Annie Oakley. the remark needs to be removed or re-written so as to be a broader statement about Annie's superstar status. Could someone handle the re-write? 76.124.158.50 (talk) 02:30, 29 March 2014 (UTC)BrattySoul