Talk:Dawson Turner

Doing this the proper way since Anon won't
Ok, this edit by the IP-hopping anon who has been disrupting the article actually included something like a coherent explanation instead of temper tantrums and impotent legal threats.

I found the book he was talking about, and the photo in this article appears to be Thomas Turner.

However, this other source (also available here and in color here and alternate color here) by Gratz identifies the photo as Dawson Turner.

The source identifying the picture as Thomas Turner was published 1840 by Thomas Turner. The source identifying the picture as Dawson Turner was published in 1920 with no connection to Turner beyond describing his autograph collection.

Either:
 * Thomas Turner's publishers never met him despite being hired to publish a book "for private distribution only" with no credit to themselves, somehow had Dawson Turner's picture, and (despite the rest of their good work) either lazily or mistakenly decided that one good Turner deserves another, and neither men complained after. (At least four assumptions).
 * Gratz made a mistake well after both men were dead. (One assumption).

I believe the latter scenario requires fewer assumptions and so seems more likely.

Ian.thomson (talk) 19:38, 21 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I would remove the picture, but I don't want to reward the IP until he at least acknowledges that there's other ways to do things besides vandalize the article. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:49, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, blocked their current IP address since it's clear they're just gonna be a pig-headed child. Removed the pic for the reasons I've given above. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:46, 21 August 2017 (UTC)