Talk:Doc Holliday
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Georgia (U.S. state) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Arizona, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Arizona. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
Contents |
[edit] Pop culture section
Might I suggest that someone with the time and inclination create a separate section near the bottom of the entry concerning "Doc Holliday in Historical Fiction"? The list, including author, title, and copyright date, while not extensive--perhaps a dozen works total--would be, IMO, both an interesting and edifying addition. Thanks.
Hi, everybody. For some reason there's no discussion about changes being made to the Doc Holliday page, and here's the place to have them.
[edit] THE PHOTO OF DOC
One thing we need to get straight first, is the picture of "Doc." I don't think the one being that was used in the first Wiki bio, is Holliday. It doesn't look like the only authentic closeup of doc, which is the 1872 graduation portrait of the 20-year old Holliday in Karen Holliday Tanner's book _Doc Holliday: a Family Portrait_ (the one I've put up now). That one is of an "ash blond" man (as in Wyatt's description). Also, the authentic (but poor quality) standing portrait of Doc in Prescott from 1879 (which is signed) shows he hadn't changed all that much, by then. The "other" guy, in the 3 photos we have of this other guy, not only has darker hair but also different ears and I think a squarer chin. I don't think it's Doc. I've labeled them all as questionable but put them in, and haven't even included the various photos of yet other men who are not even close to being Doc. The standing 1879 Prescott photo should eventually be included in the bio, but I've yet to find a print good enough to digitize.
On advice about pre-1923 photos, I've copied a bunch of "Doc" photos from various old sources, none of which are copyrightable.
Sbharris 03:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] HOLLIDAY IN POPULAR CULTURE
Somebody has added the Wiki box suggesting that this particular section of Doc's bio doesn't conform to the "formal" encyclopedia tone expected of a Wiki article. I didn't write most of this section, but my general response is: "why should it?" The encyclopedic style is fine for most of this article, but in this particular "pop culture" section we discuss something more nebulous, which is the impact of Holliday on the national psyche, and on art and pop culture. Should this be a separate article?
And what do we do for the separate article? This is part of a more general issue. Wikipedia has entries on a number of pop culture things, from rock and roll bands to particular modern films, which would never appears in the Britannica. Should they all be removed, or should they be rewriten in Britannica style? Do you even want to read an article on Alice Cooper (say) or Night of the Living Dead part II, as they might appear in the Britannica?? Somebody is very confused, or very conflicted, on what Wiki "should" be (or perhaps, on what it already IS). So read the Wiki on Alice Cooper, and get back to me.
As a further addition, I'm having problems with the idea that all POVs are equally valid (let's disregard engineering and the sciences where opinions can tested objectively). If POVs are qually valid they would need to be equally represented. But there's not space for that. However, for many things there's a majority POV and it should get majority space. Most cultural icons are cultural icons for a reason. That they are icons is a fact. There's not much point in devoting equal space to the few people (and there are always a few) who can't stand them, and think they shouldn't be. Sbharris 03:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Doc Holliday (band)
"Doc Holliday" is also the name of a Southern Rock band. Their "the last ride" on "Doc Holliday rides again" of 1981 is a classic heavy metal song about motorbike riding. The band has a website Doc Holliday --Matthead 03:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Photograph section
Surely we can get someone to better organize that section (someone with more knowledge of formating than I have. Donwilson 04:22, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
- Can't help more than I have. I did take out the Earp photo which was messing this section up somewhat. The Kilmer photo actually works to introduce Doc in popular culture, but we're going to get flack from the Quaid fans. Feel free to add an equal size Quaid one right here.Steve 02:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] This is not an article about Doc Holliday movies or Val Kilmer
We can put this photo in the "Doc in film or popular culture section," tho. Steve
[edit] More encyclopaedic, less romantic
A lot of the Western-style romanticism should be purged from this article. It's not too bad, but there are times (e.g. "Nobody every thought he would die with his boots off, or in bed") that it really is too much. --Saforrest 15:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
- Agree, there. That one's not MY line. Feel free to go in and soften up anything that really stands out as too smarmy. It's a community project, after all. If you have this reaction, so will some other readers, and we want to create a reference which does not draw attention to its own style. WP:NSB (No Singing Buckaroos). This can be a problem with Old Western bios, which sometimes tend to sound like they's all written by Will Geer, parder. You know? SBHarris 17:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Holiday's dental tools
Somewhat off-topic, but I recall hearing sometime back that Holiday's dental tools turned up- anyone have information on this? Probably just a fake though.
- No there's a photo of them in several doc bios. It's not a office set of tools as we think of dentistry today. It's an engraved pocket-portable set of basic stuff like picks and ligament elevators and so on. No syringe, but that would have been glass anyway. I'm not sure if dentists in doc's day even used injectable anethesia; I would guess not (though a solution of cocaine would have worked). There would have been no nitrous oxide in the West. In some cases I think you just had to get drunk and, ah, grit yer teeth. We don't know anything of Doc's actual techniques (we know he once won a prize for making a best set of false teeth, and was said by at least Bat Masterson to have been a good dentist, which is notable since Masterson didn't like him). We do know that injectable morphine, ether and chloroform were all freely available in the 1870's, even in towns of the Old West, and were widely used. Billy Clanton got local injections of morphine around his wounds before he died, so my guess is that dental patients in severe cases might have gotten something similar (albeit not with today's nice thin needles).SBHarris 02:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ashley Wilkes?????
Citation is needed for the assertion that Margaret Mitchell said she based Ashley Wilkes on Holliday to some extent. If there was ever a character in fiction that does NOT resemble Doc Holliday it's the guy Rhett Butler called "the godlike wooden-headed Mr. Wilkes."
[edit] Contradiction
In this section
The dedicated gambler, gunman reputation
We have this
One documented instance happened when Holliday was employed during that railroad dispute. On July 19th, 1879, Holliday and noted gunman John Joshua Webb were seated in a saloon in Las Vegas, New Mexico, when a former Army scout named Mike Gordon began yelling loudly at one of the saloon girls. When the man stormed from the saloon, Holliday followed him. Gordon produced his pistol and fired one shot, missing. Holliday immediately drew and fired, killing Gordon. Holliday was placed on trial for the shooting, but was acquitted, much based on the testimony of Webb. [1]
Then in this section
Tombstone, Arizona Territory
We have this
Despite Doc Holliday's reputation for deadliness over the years, which has grown in the telling, Tom McLaury remains the only man that there is contemporary historical evidence that Holliday killed up to that point. There is little doubt that there were later victims of Holliday during the Earp Vendetta Ride, but evidence is sketchy.
Didn't the Gordon Incident happen before the McLaury one?
- It did, but the problem is that there's no good contemporary evidence Doc killed Gordon. A drunk girl-grazed Gordon did fire a shot or two into Webb and Doc's saloon in Las Vegas, NM July 19, 1879 (more than two years before the OK Corral incident). This fire was returned by one or more citizens but the newspapers of the time don't say who. One hit Gordon in the high chest/shoulder and he died the next morning. The coroner's jury returned justifiable homicide. There's no historical evidence Doc was ever tried for this. The article claiming the facts does not give its own references, and I'm going to ask for cite. No, Doc didn't leave town because of this incident. The stories of Doc having killed Gordon come from reform politicos in Las Vegas writing years later, trying to make hay of Doc's (by then) even worse reputation. And Bat Masterson, who was known for a tall tale, and in any case didn't like Doc, wrote in 1886 that Doc had killed Gordon. But none of this is strong evidence. SBHarris 11:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Get It Straight!
Has no one read the Fourth Horseman. It is John Henry Holliday's biography. I think, before you write about someone, you should research ALL materials on their life. You only give one point of view for Doc Holliday's life. While he was no hero, he was not a cold blooded vicious killer either. He simple had a death wish in my opinion. He didn't want to drown in his own blood one night while hemorraging. Who would? Also you implied he that he was a drunk and not a very good marksmen. Well, if that were so he would've never had a legend grow from his life. He had to be somewhat good in order to survive several shoot-outs wouldn't he? Just because you don't have concrete proof doesn't mean it didn't happen. If your going to report on someones life, make sure you get them from the right angle. I've looked at several pages on this site for westerners. All the ones I have read have been negative. Either they are crooked lawmen, or cheating gamblers, or they are back shooters and rapist. No author alive was there back then. You cannot cast untrue images of people without knowing them. I would appriciate it if you could write without making strong willed people, who opened the way west for us, look like petty criminals or killers. No one is concerned about YOUR view of these people. We want to know them! Also it was reported he shot a carpetbagger and his driver before he ever left Georgia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.223.40.130 (talk) 06:43, 1 April 2007 (UTC).
