Talk:Edmund Creffield

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Oregon Low‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Washington / Seattle Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Seattle.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Links for consideration

Valfontis (talk) 23:01, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As Valfontis well knows, I'm new to this process, so apologies in advance for any unintended breach of protocol. If this is a request for comment on including these links in the Edmund Creffield article, here's my opinion. Style of of both links is somewhat lurid compared to the encyclopedic tone of Wiki articles. However this sensationalized style is entirely in keeping with the way the topic of Creffield/Holy Rollers/Brides of Christ has been handled over the last 100 years, so in the case of these links I think it appropriate.

As for content, John's article seems historically accurate and avoids buying into unsubstantiated rumor to spice up his piece. McCracken's book is very thorough in exploring seemingly everything that has been said on this topic, facts and rumors alike. Her page suggested for linking does have a Buy Here button for those who wish to purchase her work. This may conflict with the No Promotion guidelines which have been cited to me previously. However this page also contains lots of information and interesting links for further exploration of the topic. It is possible for people exploring The Holy Rollers to learn more from this page without making a book purchase.

Finally, Wikipedia:WikiProject Oregon/History begins by paraphrasing Stewart "...Holbrook speaking at the Oregon Historical Society in 1940, saying that Oregon had a wonderful opportunity to exploit and market its history..." Holbrook's work on the Creffield topic seems to show that he wasn't above embellishing the facts in pursuit of titilating his audience. These two links suggested for inclusion refrain from Holbrookian embellishment while managing to promote further interest in a very murky piece of Oregon history. If, at the same time, they sell a few books of historical merit, I see no problem.

My preference would be to include both links.Hdcinore (talk) 03:57, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, not a breach of protocol at all. But actually, this isn't really a request for comment, some of us stash links on the talk page for later expansion of articles, so this is more of a to-do list (frankly usually no one notices these jottings!). And in light of the recent talk of spamming, I wasn't in a big hurry to add these links to the article--one because it's selling a book and one because it's from a WP:ORE member. But thanks for your comments! Very helpful. If User:Finn-jd-john is around I hope he will join in. Funny, Stewart Holbrook isn't mentioned in the article at all. He probably should be, even if he's a bit of a sensationalist. Sorry I haven't had a chance to follow up on your suggestions on my talk page. Feel free to copy them over here. I asked another editor to help out too but he's been kind of busy. We'll get it sorted out eventually. This might be an interesting topic on which, to try for a GA. Valfontis (talk) 07:27, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for continuing my education on this process. So now I'm curious - if talk pages get ignored, what's the advantage to jotting here rather than in the sandbox? I'll find time to move my suggestions to this spot in the next couple of days.Hdcinore (talk) 23:12, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The primary reason Holbrook needs to be mentioned in many Oregon-related articles -- despite the fact he followed the now disfavored practice of never letting the facts get in the way of a good story -- is that most people know about these things only thru Holbrook's writings. Another reason is that he usually provides a juicy quotation or two worth adding to the article & allows it to be more than a dry recitation of the facts. -- llywrch (talk) 22:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possible edits and additions

First, full disclosure: I'm married to Linda Crew, author of Brides of Eden, a True Story Imagined. This Historical novel is listed under Further Reading in the Edmund Creffield article. In the course of her research, I became quite familiar with the topic of The Holy Rollers as well. At this point, my interest is in improving the Wikipedia article, not promoting my wife's work from 2001. I see a number of additions and corrections which could be made, however I don't want to take the time to work in the details and relocate sources if these changes are seen as unuseful, too much unnecessary detail, or whatever.

Here's partial list:

Creffield did not "purchase a small island;" he and his followers camped/squatted on Smith Island, a substantial island in the Willamette south of Corvallis, and raided the peach orchards on neighboring Kiger Island.

When the weather was no longer condusive to camping, they moved into the house of Orlando Victor Hurt, just south of Corvallis on the banks of the Marys River. O. V.'s wife, son and at least two daughters were involved with Creffield's group at the time. When Hurt could no longer tolerate the group, they moved east across the Willamette to the Beach house. It was from this house that Creffield was seized for tar & feathering, then run out of Corvallis. After leaving Corvallis, Creffield married O. V.'s daughter Maud in Albany, then fled for Portland. Maud was to be Creffield's only lawful wife. At this point after a series of sanity hearings instigated by irate husbands and fathers, many of Creffield's women followers were committed to the State Mental Hospital or the Boys & Girls Aid Society in Portland.

Creffield eventually snuck back to Corvallis and, unbeknownst to O. V., lived in hiding under the Hurt house in Corvallis for several months.

Later it was Lewis Hartley, a brother, husband or father of Creffield followers (I can pin that down), who failed in the attempt to shoot Creffield near Waldport.

In Seattle, following the shooting of Creffield and later George Mitchell, Maud Hurt Creffield remained there in custody, judged Not Guilty by reason of insanity for complicity in Ester Mitchell's shooting of her brother George. She soon died, either of intentional starvation, or more directly from strychnine poisoning (as later did Ester Mitchell). As she requested, Maud was buried beside Creffield, her husband, in a cemetery overlooking Seattle. After her suicide by strychnine poisoning, Ester Mitchell was buried in what is now an overgrown pioneer cemetery overlooking Waldport, Oregon. I have personally seen all of these graves but doubt that my eyewitnessing of the headstones is to be regarded as a conventional source, however I can relocate the information which sent us to these locations.

Much of this information is easily verifialbe at the External Link currently part of Edmund Creffield, WPA Historical Records of Benton County, OR, which quotes from a number of Oregonian articles from 1906. For the other facts I would of course have to cite sources. Also the above is not proposed as an As Is edit. These additions would need to be worked into the existing article.

I'm hoping for comment, postive or otherwise, before proceeding. Thanks.Hdcinore (talk) 04:44, 4 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hdcinore (talk • contribs)

Previous was unintended beginner's goof. Not trying to post unsigned. Thanks Bot. Hdcinore (talk) 04:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC) Hdcinore (talk) 16:15, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]