Talk:Crispus Attucks

message: This selection from the article sounds dubious:50 cent shot Crispus Attucks
:Recent evidence points to the fact that Crispus Attucks was not literally the first man to be killed, but that he was struck by a bullet deflected from another person.
I think we need to have that recent evidence adduced in the article.   Ortolan88 00:38, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: it was added by Nichalp .  I put a note on his talk page.  but does it really matter how he was killed (whether by a delflected bullet or not; wasn't it inaccurate musket fire) as much as that he died first? Whosyourjudas (talk) 00:48, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: First killed?

message: Last Monday I watched this program Unsolved History -- on Discovery Channel. It detailed the Boston Massacre and mentioned that the autopsy revealed that the bullet passed entered his body and deflected in another direction while in his body. While a normal bullet passes a body in a linear fashion (a straight line), the only way that a bullet would deflect, was if it passed wholly through another person on its way so as to slow down the velocity. They said that the most likely candidate (at this moment I can't recall his9;åḽṗ</font> | ✉]] 20:37, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
:The articles not about science, it's more likely about American history. Allied Rangoon/Anti-VandalMaster (talk) 21:59, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsolved History

message: The caption wrongly identified both the date and artist. The old caption was taken directly from a grade school project, but I have used the information made available by the National Archives, in conjunction with other sites:
http://www.archives.gov/research/american-revolution/pictures/
http://nfo.dodmedia.osd.mil/CGI-BIN/om_isapi.dll?clientID=214552&infobase=wandc.nfo&softpage=Document
Ken Albers 19:43, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Image caption

message: Not a tub anymore. --Banana04131 18:16, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed Stub

message: I just completed a major revision/expansion of the article.  I made an earnest effort to enable readers to clearly understand that relatively little is known for sure about Attucks, while simultaneously treating the folk history and sentiment surrounding Attucks with the importance and gravitas it deserves by merit of the significance his person holds as one of the few well-known and much-discussed people of color from this era of United States history.
I made a small reduction in the amount of general info about the Boston Massacre as that can be found in the Boston Massacre article itself.  I did, however, replace it with a greater amount of material that deals specifically with Attucks in relation to the massacre.
This is probably my largest and most carefully-worded Wikipedia article so far.  I hope it meets the approval of many, or even most, readers.
-- House of Scandal 04:35, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Major Revision/expansion

message: The intro paragraph of the article states:
:Crispus Attucks (circa 1723 - March 5, 1770), was one of five people killed in the Boston Massacre.  He has been frequently named as the first martyr for the cause of American Independence and was the only person killed in the event whose name is commonly remembered.
"was one of five people killed in the Boston Massacre" and "was the only person killed in the event whose name is commonly remembered" are drastically incongruent. Obviously, one of them is bull. I just don't know which one...
~ Flameviper Who's a Peach? 23:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I do not see a conflict in those statements...he was one of five killed, and is the only one whose name is commonly remembered or known...Whats the incongruence?  Engr105th 12:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: INTRO

message: The first line of the article states Attucks served in the Army for 20 years...I can find no evidence for this - a slave would not have been eligible, and anyway the "army" was British, so militia is the only option for a runaway slave, but that's also unlikely. Anybody have a source for his military service?  Engr105th 16:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Served in the Army ??

message: I found proof that :Image:Crispus Attucks.jpg is public domain.  See the image page for details.  Thus, I put it back in the article. Superm401 - Talk 19:50, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This picture, where is it from? Who produced it and when? I'm guessing it is mid-19th century? Drutt (talk) 02:06, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Image:Crispus Attucks.jpg]]

message: There was a commemorative coin released by the US Mint in 1998 with Attucks' bust on the front. Here is a link to it, but I'm unsure of exactly where to place this in the article and how much information to give; if anyone would like to add it, that would be great.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Isaiahcambron (talk • contribs) 21:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Coin

message: The article gives Crispus Attucks' birth year as c. 1723.  From reading the article, I'm guessing the year was backdated based on the runaway slave advertisement.  If that's the case, it would be more appropriate to say possibly rather than circa.  Circa (c.) implies that we know his birth year within plus or minus 5 years.  In reality, though, he could have been born in 1753.  We simply don't know.  I would prefer doing away with the year entirely, unless there is a better source for it.  Any thoughts?
--Wechselstrom (talk) 15:51, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth Year

message: I have long felt that there ought to be a category called "People made famous by their deaths"; there was an article in either The People's Almanac or The Book of Lists and Attucks was among them, which is why I bring it up here.  There are many other such individuals to populate this category for someone with the skill and inclination!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrChainsaw77 (talk • contribs) 23:36, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Made famous by Death

message: I'm sorry, but it seems that a large portion of this article deals with the issue of Crispus' racial identity. This is the type of thing one would expect from revisionists who seek to diminish the role of African Americans in U.S. history. Crispus Attucks race should be a footnote compared to the man's accomplishments, not a major focus of his biography.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.143.59 (talk) 03:51, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Biased Article

message: The statement regarding Prince Hall ("He was a good man and a warrior.") seems to be personal opinion and has little, if anything, to do with the subject of Crispus Attucks.  Indeed it seems to come utterly out of left field.  I feel it doesn't belong here.Beetfarm Louie (talk) 00:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Prince Hall?

message: In the brief section about the memorial sculpture, "bas relief" is glossed as the "raised portion".
Bas relief is actually the "lowered portion".  I haven't seen the sculpture and have no idea whether it is bas relief, as it's termed, or the opposite, alto relief, as described.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.214.240.97 (talk) 02:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you kindly place a hyperlink and a source? Allied Rangoon/Anti-VandalMaster (talk) 22:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Bas Relief?

message: Um, why does the article body go directly from Attucks' influences and baptism at the end of the Early life section to John Adams arguing that "the soldiers fired in self-defense" in the Reactions and trials section??? Reactions to what? The Massacre? There's no mention of it in between these two sections! The very event for which Attucks is most notable is not explained or detailed in the article body?? What the hell? Nightscream (talk) 01:24, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing something?

message: Please see the Wikipedia article about 11 year old Christopher Seider who was murdered by a British Official in Boston two weeks earlier in a similar protest as the one that is called the Boston Massacre.   The so-called Boston Massacre was one in a series of protests that took place in response to the death of young Christopher Seider.   Even his headstone states this fact.  The trial records prove this fact.  That British official was convicted of murder and later pardoned by the British government.   Christopher Seider is buried in the same location as is Crispus Attucks and the other four who died as a result of the Boston Massacre.   Will someone with better skills than I please at least rewrite this article to reflect that it is absolutely disproved that Crispus Attucks was the first dead of the American Revolution?   Speaking of  headstones, all five Boston Massacre victims AND Christopher Attucks share the same headstone.     — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.191.251.196 (talk) 23:17, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Neither Crispus Attucks nor any Boston Massacre victim was first to die in Revolution

message: I've made some substantial edits to the intro and body. It was full of weasel words and phrases, editorial speculation, whole repetition of content in the body in the introduction, and unsourced claims. Questions around Attucks's ethnicity and heritage, given their volume, great variety of possible answers, and lack of consensus - have been moved to their own section.
Attuck's being called a mulatto does not necessarily imply African or European heritage, as it was commonplace in the colonial era to refer to Native Americans as mulatto based on skin tone. Moreover, there may be more reliable-source-cited instances when he was referred to as an Indian, than there are that call him a mulatto. As other editors have pointed out, the prior intro seemed strained and overloaded with racial speculation, and I've tried to make it more fact-based and essential, and move the ethnic speculation - which deserves to be included given his historical role - to its own section. In spite of the single picture that some may associate with Africans - which is admittedly a 'Speculative posthumous portrait of what Attucks may have looked like' - there is significant debate around Attuck's actual heritage, including a multitude of primary and secondary pieces of evidence. It is not in controversy that Attucks was a slave before being freed or escaping, but Native Americans from the 17th to late 18th centuries were also chattel slaves in New England and surely intermixed with other chattel slaves in some frequency. There may well have been significant African intermixture in his background, but the article should stick to the facts, and not try to bend them to fit legend. The facts are that he and his relatives were variously referred to as Indian, negro, and mulatto, which as the Fisher source notes and Forbes notes profusely, were also terms used during that period for some Native Americans with no black African or white European admixture. The popular cultural understanding of Attucks - which has been taken from an admittedly fictionalized, youth-adapted biography by Millender, and a children's book by Simon and Schuster based on Millender's story - should have no bearing on the article's content. Any feedback welcome.
Psmith85 (talk) 02:34, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Please don't evade your block. Ask for an unblock on your talk page, instead. El_C 02:13, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing unsourced claims about heritage

message: There is no direct evidence of any kind that any such Crispus Attucks was even present. The man killed was a sailor of color named Michael Johnson who was known by that name for over twenty years. The concept that this man was in fact an escaped slave known as Crispas (sic) was purely speculation. Perhaps claiming the body to be Attucks caused authorities to stop looking for the real Attucks. The name appeared in the Revere engraving but no record of who told him.    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:431A:5200:C921:CDA8:D109:2BBD (talk) 18:47, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I beg to differ. If you read the actual court transcript he is identified by witnesses by name. Indigenous girl (talk) 18:02, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced, inaccurate content in header

message: This should say "thus the first American killed in the name of American Independence." Not "thus the first American killed in the American Revolutionary War" The War had not begun, and did not begin for another 5 years. The massacre happened in 1770, Lexington and Concord in 1775. Drahgoone (talk) 05:10, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: .  Up until recently, it had "American Revolution" rather than "American Revolutionary War", so I restored it to the former, as a term pertaining to a broader time period.  –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 03:21, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2019

message: The posting for the website "Africa Within" under External links "Crispus Attucks", AfricaWithin should be removed as spam or a dead link and replaced with
"Crispus Attucks", The Humanity Archive with the external link pointing to the article below:
https://www.thehumanityarchive.com/history/crispus-attucks
JermaineDaniel (talk) 01:39, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: . Dead link removed, but new one not added.  There seems to be more than enough already.  I'm not sure what's gained by adding another; this one seems a tad promotional. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 03:23, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2020

message: This ...published in 1770 did not refer to him as "black" nor as a "Negro"
should be ...published in 1770 referred to him neither as "black" nor as a "Negro"
100.6.81.19 (talk) 14:00, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit request

message: In the 3rd para, headed as "Early Life and Ethnic Origins," at the 4th word in the 3rd line from the bottom of the paragraph, please change "sreaming" to "screaming." It is a misspelling because "sreaming" is not a word. 
Harold3Ho (talk) 17:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The possible typo is included in a quotation. Someone with the source at hand needs to first check if this is a transcription error that needs to be corrected, or if the spelling error is in the source. If the misspelling is in the source, the  template (formatted as: ) should instead be added after the misspelled word. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 21:56, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

text: Not done for now: Source for verification not available at the moment  ~ Amkgp 💬 11:28, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2020

message: Currently, the article uses the word 'ethnicity' where I would expect 'race.'  Race, though discredited by many in the scientific community, has to do with appearance, whereas ethnicity has to do with either race (i.e., as  sort or synonym or euphemism for 'race') or cultural identification.  By using the word 'ethnicity,' the article is less clear and/or implies things for which there is no given evidence. 213.109.220.252 (talk) 02:50, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Ethnicity vs. race

message: While Attucks' true ancestry will likely remain an enigma, the language used to discuss it could be chosen more carefully. The article's current wording implies a historic and/or current contradiction between Attucks being described as "African American" and his potential background as a "Mulatto", by saying that "Though he is commonly described as African-American in popular culture, two major sources of eyewitness testimony about the Massacre, both published in 1770, did not refer to Attucks as "black" nor as a "Negro," but rather as a mulatto and an Indian."* While the latter classification, Attucks as "Indian", would warrant a distinction between his popularly supposed "African-American-ness" and his potential factual ancestry, the former does not; appeals to the fact that contemporary accounts described him as neither "Black" nor "Negro" do not change this, as both terms were used differently at that time than later in history (as was the term "Mulatto", a term whose contextually unique application is already gone over in the text). More appropriate wording may be as follows: "Though he is popularly referred to as African American, Attucks' parentage may be wholly American-Indian. Contemporary sources do not describe Attucks as 'Black', or as 'Negro', but as 'Mulatto', and as 'Indian', meaning he was likely either Bi-racial or completely Indian in parentage. This, however, is complicated by the fact that, at this time, the terms 'Mulatto' and 'Indian' were often used interchangeably, the former word often being not an allusion to literal parentage or ancestry, but to skin color and its associations." Improved citation on discussion of interchangeable usage of 'Mulatto' and 'Indian' is also warranted. As of now, it simply links to a note that no longer exists on the article it links to.
*One a side note, one could note the selective use of quotations around the terms "black" and "negro", but discussing this in more detail would derail the post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7000:2703:3c00:cd9f:2d83:7153:9f26  (talk • contribs) 12:06, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Ancestry, "African-American-ness", False Dichotomies.

message: The mention of "New Providence" in a period source is hot-linked to an article for a township in New Jersey by that name. However, the reference to New Providence applies to the major populated island in the Bahamas (Attucks' connection to the Bahamas is noted later in the article), not to anywhere in New Jersey. The link should be fixed.
:Done, thanks. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 09:04, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Inaccurate link in header

message: Interesting choice of portrait being used in infobox. Does it really suit the article's theme? Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 03:56, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Portrait?

message: Change “first” American killed in American Revolution to “second”; 12YO Christopher Seider was tragically killed first on February 22, inciting unrest a la the mob that led to the killing of Attucks/the Massacre which happened happened on March 5. 2600:1009:B065:15B0:1C4C:B0D5:F085:68E0 (talk) 06:38, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Urro[talk][edits] 15:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protected edit request on 6 February 2024

message: The article linked to Christopher Seider states his ages as 12, while the Attucks article states Seider’s age as 11. That needs to be ironed out. 2600:1009:B065:15B0:1C4C:B0D5:F085:68E0 (talk) 06:53, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a good suggestion but not a proper suggestion for edit requests. I recommend simply leaving a note on the talk page rather than making a request. Thank you! — Urro[talk][edits] 15:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protected edit request on 6 February 2024 (2)