Talk:Disappearance of Richard Colvin Cox

OK, "Colvin"? or "Calvin"?
The title of this article has "Calvin," but the name in the lead is "Colvin." Which is it? Feel free to revert me if I am wrong, but I am going to change the name in the lead paragraph to match the name in the article title. ProfessorPaul 04:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * After looking at images of the book available through Amazon's website, I can see it is clearly "Colvin" not "Calvin" according to Maihafer. That means we need to go through the bother of getting the page renamed... --TravisM 08:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

"which proposes a solution"...which is?? Is this some kind of teaser for this book, in an encyclopedia article? If the book is relevant, this should be clarified. 71.63.119.49 04:41, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Absolutely, and exactly why I came to the Discussion board - What solution does this book propose?? Anybody know? Engr105th (talk) 06:47, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

It's "Colvin" And I Will Complete The Article After It Is Changed
Okay, I went to the library and actually GOT the book, "Oblivion" and so am now, having read it, in a position to complete the article, by putting forth the very reasonable theory advanced in Maihafer's book. However, I don't really want to touch the article until the title is corrected, because Cox's middle name was COLVIN and NOT "CALVIN". I would make the change myself but for the fact that I have no idea how to do so. Hi There (talk) 04:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

So, what will it take for this to be corrected? Signed, Jeff, a curious reader —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.185.18.207 (talk) 19:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Restoring article so it tells everyone ...
... why it has just one source. Book was authored officially by a poor high school teacher (Marshall Jacobs) who took it as far as it can go ...

(repeat from "edit summary" of today's edit) ... No, fellow anonymous Wikipedia editor, article doesn't contain "promo of book" or "mini-bio of author." It explains that book credits one author (Jacobs) who depended heavily on West Point expert (Maihafer) now dead. wildhartlivie, book did come out first with a vanity press in '96 but was published again three years later by this company that pays its authors.

second publisher

Lots of famous books and plays started as vanity, such as Arthur Miller's The Crucible.

Hence somebody tagged article calling into question its lone source. As long as Maihafer remains dead, and as long as Richard Colvin Cox was born 82 years ago, then what other source can ever be? Article clarifies book "proposes a solution." You can read solution in book. Bottom line: Cox probably lived until early '90s and he didn't want anyone to go public with old photographs of him from mass circulations Life and Coronet, and "a mysterious friend called George" probably was David Westervelt. He died of leukemia in his 40s in '69. His widow didn't know him when Cox vanished and she doesn't know anything about it. Jacobs said Mrs. Westervelt thinks the personality of the man she knew matches the man who tortured those people in Germany. Abusive talking on the phone with West Point receptionist also sounds like her man. She doesn't really know, right? David Westervelt was married to another woman in 1950s, dead now. That's the end of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.203.140.101 (talk) 04:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

There is a second source on the Cox mystery. If you read the book, you see that a second person investigated it so many years after Cox was declared legally dead in '57. The daily newspaper in his hometown ran a series of front-page articles in '82. The year '82 is old enough that the Mansfield paper isn't online, but anyone can get interlibrary loan of the microfilm. Or you can read a summary of it in the Jacobs book. But that's our singular, probably unreliable source, right? I told you about the legitimate publisher, Potomac Books, that took responsibility for the whole thing three years after Jacobs paid for vanity. Oh, well, whatever ... go to Mansfield, Ohio, go to dispute resolution, but for heaven's sake let's do something productive ... something! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.203.140.101 (talk) 05:21, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

This article could have multiple legitimate sources
I get it. The less I type, the more I reveal. Such as the fact that Potomac Books (not Potomac Press) isn't a vanity publisher. Its web site's instruction for aspiring writers is to submit your manuscript but ...

[http://www.potomacbooksinc.com/info/ContactUS.aspx#PS ... don't call them; they'll call you.]

The company was called Brassey's when it published the sole Richard Cox book in 1996. The web site says front and center it was "formerly Brassey's." Here is a library catalog that tells you the Cox book was published by Brassey's. It's one of the search results you get for the author Harry Maihafer.

Main source for this article was published by Brassey's in 1996, now known as Potomac Books.

There are other sources on the Cox mystery besides the book. The Mansfield News Journal ran two series of articles: one in 1982 and the other in January of 2010. Most installments began on the paper's front page. Maybe someone can add references to them in this Wikipedia article along with a new Wikipedia Commons pdf or two with permission from the News Journal.

Accusations of sockpuppetry can't change these two lies:

1 -- The only book ever published on the Cox mystery is a vanity-published book.

2 -- It's the only published source on Cox.

I'm sick of the lies.

I added something earlier today to the 7-11 discussion page.


 * Lies or mistakes? --2.25.130.27 (talk) 03:52, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Something Missing?
There seems to be something missing here, namely Jacobs & Maihafer's theory/account of Cox's life between his disappearance and his turning up the hospital in Bethesda, Maryland some 40 years later. Can anybody shed some light on this? Ttenchantr (talk) 00:12, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Jacobs / Maihafer nonsense
Cox was a legally-bound member of the US Army as a West Point cadet. His absence, if voluntary, constituted the crime of desertion. An offense both the US Army and the FBI took quite seriously. It is preposterous to believe that he would have been a patient in a US government hospital, able to dismiss attempts to identify his fugitive self with the excuse of not wanting to have his privacy invaded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.110.29.215 (talk) 14:16, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

BLP?
If he was declared legally dead in 1957, this is not a biography of a living person. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 17:15, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

An "Event" in his life
It is an event in his life, not a biography. Adamdaley (talk) 07:11, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Conclusions of the Jacobs investigation
Having just finished reading oblivion I have to say that I am a confused as to why it's answer is not on this wikimedia page? Is the book considered to be untrustworthy or something? 125.209.158.144 (talk) 08:45, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Fiancee
One question that immediately comes up is whether his fiancee ever heard from him and whether something may have changed their relationship. Is this not discussed in the literature?Bill (talk) 03:57, 17 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Betty never heard from him. The Oblivion book says that.  During the massive search for him in New York, she was in Ohio thinking he was still committed to her. Brent Brant (talk) 00:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)