Talk:William Becknell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Texas, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Texas.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the William Becknell article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri.

[edit] Dates?

I've got nothing to do tonight, so I ... Forget that. An old Who's Who lists his dates as 1796-1865, both of which disagree with the article. Any ideas? Badbilltucker 18:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Huh... I googled for a bit over lunch. The Handbook of Texas link agrees with the current article, but some major online encyclopedias don't, nor does the online version of the text of historical marker that Texas put up in 1957. On the other hand, the LDS genealogy site, http://www.familysearch.org/, gives us a complete record that matches the Handbook article, as well as some other partial records that match Who's Who. And on the third hand, I saw an online page that cited the "Handbook of Texas" but had the Who's Who dates. That third hand makes me suspect that someone published bad data early on, it got widely disseminated, and the truth is chasing it, with the Handbook having had it one way then and now the other (wild-ass guess). Unless we find something authoritive that explains what's going on, I reckon we have to note both "views" on the facts. Personally, I'd take the Handbook's data, but that's a POV... studerby 21:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)