Talk:Betsy Ross House

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Betsy Ross House. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:40, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

If an independent reliable source says most historians say the Ross flag story is bunk, Wikipedia says that most historians say the Ross flag story is bunk.

But "There is no survey of major Early American historians to validate this claim"? That is not how it works. On Wikipedia, what independent reliable sources state is pretty much accepted as fact. The sources do not have to prove what they are saying and, frankly, it does not matter if you agree. What independent reliable sources say is "verifiable" and verifiability is one of the pilars of the project.

There are billions of things on Wikipedia that millions of people disagree with. When mainstream reliable sources treat it as a fact that the Earth is spherical, HIV causes AIDS, Obama was born in the U.S. and the Ross flag story is a "tenacious piece of fiction"[[1], Wikipedia reports those statements as simple facts. While myths and conspiracy theories are a dime a dozen, some of them are notable and Wikipedia writes about them, while making it clear that the beliefs are fringe nonsense.

But what if you have a source that you feels proves the alternative is possible? Well, if you have independent reliable sources which directly make that claim, there might be a place for discussing a possible controversy (depending on the reliability of the source and the WP:WEIGHT of coverage). If, on the other hand, the source does not directly make the claim, you are engaging in original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. (So, if an article mentions a 1774 connection between George Washington and the Ross' shop -- but does not discuss a claim that this supports the Ross flag myth -- you cannot use it to claim the Ross flag story is plausible.) - SummerPhDv2.0 03:56, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The IP editor has returned with this edit. The edit summary is entirely focused on the issue of "upholsterer" vs. "seamstress" and the Miller source: "Corrected to upholsterer from seamstress—not sure why people are so insistent she was a seamstress. Horrendous misrepresentation of Miller’s book regarding the flag story in the history field. Odd to use Miller to misrepresent one thing, but ignore that Miller proved, clearly, that Betsy was an upholsterer. Facts." The edit also removes the Washington Post source, which abundantly clear and direct, calling the story, "the most tenacious piece of fiction" with "no credible historical evidence". (The edit further excises the weakness of the claim that the tourist attraction house is the correct location for the shop in question.) The cite to the book seems to point to "It didn't take long for professional and avocational historians...to question the story's veracity...It was easy to find places where the story as the children recalled it simply didn't hold up to scholarly scrutiny."
Given the IP's persistence, let's see what we have:
"Every historical study has come to the same conclusion. There's no good historical evidence that she did. But that doesn't mean she didn't. There's simply a lack of documentation. Most historians believe the story is apocryphal."[NBC, quoting Marc Leepson, author of "Flag: An American Biography.")
"that story is likely apocryphal"[2]
"Today, historians almost uniformly agree that family oral history is not particularly reliable. Though evidence shows that Betsy Ross made flags for the Pennsylvania navy, nothing else in Canby’s story can be verified. Specifically, a few points trouble researchers: No evidence shows that a congressional flag committee existed in 1776. If one had, Washington probably would not have been on it because he was not a member of Congress. No record shows Congress addressing the flag issue in any way until it passed the 1777 resolution. Nothing suggests that Washington ever dealt with Betsy Ross for any reason. No written material of any sort supports the story." history.org/Colonial Williamsburg Foundation
"pleasant tradition, if not accurate history" Proceedings of the New York State Historical Association
"the Betsy Ross fantasy" The William and Mary Quarterly
...and so on. The only sources I can find presenting the story as likely are downmarket children's books.[3][4]
With no discussion from the IP, I will continue to revert with requests to discuss the issue. If it continues after that, I will request page protection. - SummerPhDv2.0 19:16, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, it says "seamstress" rather than "upholsterer" because -- though it was originally an upholstery shop -- Ross is best remembered for an apocryphal story about her making a flag (which is not upholstery). - SummerPhDv2.0 19:21, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There are at least 2 other articles trying to decipher the mythology surrounding Betsy Ross, Betsy Ross and Betsy Ross flag. I recommend we keep the arguments in those respective articles. This article is about a house, so the arguments about Betsy Ross' real or imagined contributions to American history are really out of scope, especially since there are other articles that deal with it much better. Link to the other two articles and let the readers explore those topics in more detail if they're interested. The question about whether or not she lived in this house is much more relevant to this particular article. Canute (talk) 15:34, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Betsy_Ross_House&oldid=1199933491"