Talk:Richard Benjamin Harrison

"License" Spelled Wrong
Under the Military section of Career, license is spelled wrong(as licence)in the second paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.131.72.169 (talk) 00:54, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit request - year store opened
The Gold & Silver Pawn Shop was opened in 1989, not 1988, as the article incorrectly states two times in the article - in the lead and in the "Business and reality television" section. That's wrong. Actually, Rick Harrison (not Richard) received a license to pawn in April 1988, but the store did not actually open for business until 1989. Please correct the year in both places. Also, I would recommend changing the word "founded" to "opened" in both places. Here is the source to verify this information, which is used in the Pawn Stars article:

You can just paste the full cite above right next to the year in the first usage, and just use next to the year in the second usage.

Thanks. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 04:40, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. Thanks again. Nightscream (talk) 12:44, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks and you're welcome. However, the "Business and reality television" section still needs corrected. Where it says, "When the lease expired in 1988, Harrison and his son Rick founded what would become the World Famous Gold & Silver Pawn Shop at 713 Las Vegas Boulevard South", it should instead say, "After the lease expired, Harrison and his son Rick opened what would become the World Famous Gold & Silver Pawn Shop in 1989 at 713 Las Vegas Boulevard South". And attach the new, abbreviated version of the cite ( } right next to "1989". And the lead should say "opened" instead of "founded", too. Also, edit requests should be closed by using the the  template instead of just removing the  template. Thanks, again! --76.189.109.155 (talk) 16:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. Thanks again. :-) Nightscream (talk) 03:00, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi NS. Sorry, but you did not make the changes I requested. I said that part of the sentence should be: "After the lease expired, Harrison and his son Rick opened what would become the World Famous Gold & Silver Pawn Shop in 1989 at 713 Las Vegas Boulevard South" and the new source should be attached right next to "1989" in that sentence, not at the end of the sentence. And the word "founded" should be changed to "opened" in the lead. Thanks. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 04:22, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

What's wrong with placing the citation at the end of the sentence? Nightscream (talk) 14:46, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Because there's already another cite there, which is verifying the other content in the sentence. The Las Vegas Weekly cite is being used solely to verify the year the store was opened. So if you could please revise the sentence as I requested, for proper accuracy and context, I'd really appreciate it. I also made a small, follow-up request at Rick Harrison. Thanks for your help on this. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 15:07, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Cites can indeed be placed in the middle of a sentence to support a specific portion of it, and at times, multiple cites have been placed all at the end. I've done both, depending on the way a sentence is worded. In the second passage in question, it says, "When the lease expired in 1989, Harrison and his son Rick opened what would become the World Famous Gold & Silver Pawn Shop at 713 Las Vegas Boulevard South, located less than two miles from the Las Vegas Strip." The problem here is that 1989 is not the spot where the material ends that is supported by the Las Vegas Weekly story. At best it might be the word "opened". That's why I put it at the end with the other cite, which supports both the 1989 store opening date and the rest of the material in the sentence after that. Doing so does not make the article inaccurate; it just means that a reader has to read the two citations to see which ones support which material. Nightscream (talk) 23:09, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi NS. I think there's some confusion here. Their prior lease did not expire in 1989. It had said 1988, which was correct, but for some reason you changed it to 1989, which is not what I had requested. When their prior lease expired (1988) and when the new store opened (1989) are two different issues and two different years. That's why I changed the wording to, "After the lease expired, Harrison and his son Rick opened what would become the World Famous Gold & Silver Pawn Shop in 1989 at 713 Las Vegas Boulevard South". An alternate way of saying it, for more specificity and clarity, would be: "The lease expired in 1988 and Harrison and his son Rick then opened what would become the World Famous Gold & Silver Pawn Shop in 1989 at 713 Las Vegas Boulevard South". The cite that was already there verifies the content that had been there, but it does not verify the year the new store opened. Therefore, that's why I asked that the Las Vegas Weekly cite be attached to the year (1989) only. That's exactly how it's done in the Pawn Stars article. Thanks for your patience in this matter. :) --76.189.109.155 (talk) 02:47, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, why don't you sign up for a username account and fix these things yourself? You seem to have a pretty good handle on the material, and a good eye for detail. The community could sure use good editors like yourself, and a username account makes it easier for people to address you and get to know you as an individual. Just a thought.

I fixed the article. And just so you know, I'm planing to eventually add more details to the Pawn Stars article and Harrison and Chumlee articles, based on Harrison's autobiography, including the specific page numbers. I read it last year, and took copious notes, but unfortunately, the document with the notes was accidentally deleted from my Desktop (ARRRGGGH!!!). Eventually, I'll rewrite that document in order to beef up the articles, and that includes details on the history of the Harrisons' various businesses. Thanks again. Nightscream (talk) 14:38, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello again, Mr. Scream. ;) Thanks for the nice comments. For the answer to your question about why I don't have a registered account, you can read this thread on my talk page. I'm glad to hear that you'll be expanding those articles. Sounds good. Btw, there's a stray "p" at the top of the article that you accidentally typed when you made this edit. Thanks, again. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 22:28, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Run-on sentence
"In October 2012, A&E Network and The History Channel, as well as Harrison and the rest of the cast members from the show, were sued in Clark County District Court in Las Vegas for interference with business practices by Wayne F. Jefferies,[42] a Las Vegas promoter[43] and the Harrisons' manager, who represented them and "Chumlee" Russell in their television business dealings"

This has got to be the longest and most confusing run-on sentence I have ever read.


 * That is not a run-on sentence.


 * Also, new sections, like new posts, go at the bottom, not at the top. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

How about something like...

"In October 2012, Wayne F. Jefferies sued A&E Networks, The History Channel, Gold & Silver Pawn Shop Inc. and the stars of the show: Rick Harrison, Corey Harrison, Richard Benjamin Harrison and Austin "Chumlee" Russell. Jeffries, a Las Vegas promoter, filed a civil lawsuit in Clark County District Court in Las Vegas seeking unspecified monetary damages on allegations of breach of oral contract and interference.

The lawsuit alleges Jefferies was hired in 2007 as a consultant, manager and adviser to pitch the "Pawn Stars" concept to networks. The lawsuit alleges Jefferies negotiated oral contracts in May 2009 to represent the three Harrisons and in June 2009 to represent Russell. Jefferies accused the pawnshop stars and network officials of improperly firing him and failing to pay promised fees and shares of merchandising deals."

I got that from 42 & 43 above. The next source was a dead link and I edited the article to mark it as such. I didn't look at at any further sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.248.73.207 (talk) 22:13, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Net Worth
I added two "rs" ("unreliable source?") tags to this article, and one each to the articles Rick Harrison and Corey Harrison.

This article says "Harrison's net worth has been estimated to be $5 million USD" but also says "Net worth	Increase $8 million" in the infobox, with an up arrow for the "Increase". The $5 million one is used as a source on the other articles but doesn't seem reliable. The source for $8 million doesn't seem reliable and I'm not sure why an "Increase" graphic is there. The infoboxes on the other articles have the "Increase" up arrow also...

These sources don't cite their sources. They don't give any information as to how they arrived at those figures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.248.73.207 (talk) 20:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Richard Benjamin Harrison. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130215025615/http://www.zimbio.com:80/Las+Vegas+Sun/articles/88nzFirmNzV/Goodman+set+role+TV+judge to http://www.zimbio.com/Las+Vegas+Sun/articles/88nzFirmNzV/Goodman+set+role+TV+judge
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131224120738/http://www.zimbio.com/Las+Vegas+Sun/articles/kw0frO9lksA/Garrett+exit+Trop+MGM+Grand to http://www.zimbio.com/Las+Vegas+Sun/articles/kw0frO9lksA/Garrett+exit+Trop+MGM+Grand

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:24, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Minot doubt
I have seen pictures and comments posted in response to said pictures that imply that the old man has died recently. Can someone confirm this? so as to put it in the main article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drumerwritter (talk • contribs) 04:28, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If you Google his name(as least as I did yesterday) several hoaxes about his death come up. If he has died, it hasn't been in a RS yet. 331dot (talk) 08:25, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Death
Apart from saying on their website they would be closed for a few hours, nothing has been updated about the old man's death. They just did a tribute show where even his best friend talked. He has recently died. At the end of the show, the put his photo up with his name and it says 1941-2018. The power Nazis that control this page think I'm lying, maybe they should watch the show and let the fans actually do the editing. Kiwidave666 (talk) 14:57, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


 * So what you're saying is that there's no mention on the show's website, and you weren't able to find a mention in the news, nor an obituary link? Even a name of an episode? I did search, and nothing comes up other than rumors from 2016 that have been long debunked. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:15, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


 * It is not a question of "power", or "Nazism", or "lying", it's merely the fact that Wikipedia has policies and guidelines that govern the inclusion of material. These policies require that material added to its articles be accompanied by an inline citation of a reliable, published source, generally a secondary one. It is only because of a poor attitude on your part that you deem anything you don't like to hear with the word "Nazi", as if requiring a verified source for material added to an encyclopedia is somehow equivalent to murdering 17 million people. Nightscream (talk) 19:00, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I would add to Kiwidave that it is not up to us to prove your claims; it is up to you. Please don't make personal attacks or grossly improper comparisons and simply provide a reliable source. 331dot (talk) 19:28, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Daniel Callahan - bought or brought
"In May 2012, Daniel Callahan filed a lawsuit in the District Court in Las Vegas claiming that Harrison and his son Rick failed to provide "reasonable and necessary" security at their store, seeking around $20,000 for injuries he allegedly suffered from being "dragged out of the pawn shop and tossed onto the sidewalk" after an argument over a rifle he had brought"

Did Callahan buy the gun from the store (in which case it should be 'bought'), or did he bring the gun to the store hoping they would buy it (in which case 'brought' is correct)?Robbmonster (talk) 10:04, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

ref name=License9-11;90-91
This reference (used five times) is only explained as "Harrison (2011)". This is not enough to determine the actual source.

If it refers to Rick's "License to Pawn: Deals, Steals, and My Life at the Gold & Silver. Hyperion. 2011." then this needs to be made more clear. In fact, that reference should be used. (This goes for reference #11 as well) CapnZapp (talk) 12:41, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Irish heritage
The book referenced in the link doesn't mention any Irish heritage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.233.147.162 (talk) 18:31, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Length of military service and duration on board USS Chowanoc
If Mr. Harrison's final five years out of 20 in the Navy ended in 1976, he would have had to enlist at age 15. Also, the linked page for the USS Chowanoc indicates the ship was decommissioned in October 1971, rendering it impossible for his final five years of service to aboard that ship. Could it be that his years of service were exaggerated? Stigmatasaurus (talk) 20:54, 25 May 2019 (UTC)stigmatasaurus

Today's editing from this non-logging regular
Per Jimbo's design, I don't log to edit (as allowed). But I have many thousands of edits, so here goes about today's.

This article's references to the Harrison books are improved, but three still cite no page nos.; moreover, there is an overreliance on citations of article episodes—13 times—thus presenting two further problems:
 * 1) These create near to unverifiable original observations, as none of these "cite episode" provide url's, and none give time in program where supposed information appears, making verification improbable.
 * 2) They create a significant element of in the article, as these clustered cases (not thoughout the article, but overly supporting certain sections) draw on Wikipedia editor experience and memory, rather than statements from published sources that can be verified.

Hence, on the whole, the article, in these sections, violates the policies/guidelines in WP:OR and WP:VERIFY. Note, the scale of this is as follows—13 of the 62 references are to episode primary sources (21%; 13 of the total of 77 inline citations). And there are 10 citations of the Harrison book (3 sans page numbers), all of which are non-third party sourced statements; these should be considered as issues, even though not tagged. This brings the number of untraceable/primary/non-independent references to 23 of 77 citations (30%).

These observations, and attempts to move the article toward being encyclopedic—so that it might one day be a GA—are the bulk of what I did today (alongside completing and standardizing references, splitting a section, calling for expansion, etc.). Note, I did not add the "page numbers improve" or the many other possible article and section tags, because that is worrying after a sneeze when the patient has a couple localized tumors. (The real issues are the OR and repeated appearance of unverifiable statements.) Cheers. 2601:246:C700:9B0:258D:AF9C:CCA9:24A4 (talk) 19:22, 10 December 2019 (UTC)


 * The passages in question are neither "unverifiable" nor "original research" simply because they cite epsiodes, nor because they lack urls. Material violates WP:V when it can't be verified -- that is to say, when the source is not given. Original research is material that comes not from sources, but from the personal knowledge of the editor adding it. None of the material in question came from an editor's personal knowledge, experience or "memory". They come directly from the episodes themselves. How is it "memory" if the editor reviews the episode as he is adding the material to the article? What does experience have to do with it?


 * Your complaint about urls and timestamps seems to be more of a complaint about the work involved in obtaining viewing copies of the episodes in question and in reviewing them than it does about policy. You can probably rent or download the episodes online, or watch them when they air. Editors are not required to include urls nor timestamps. While those things are certainly useful, the former would exclude all non-Web-based sources. As for the latter, the episodes are only 20 minutes or so long without commercials, and they tend to go by briskly, so finding the dialogue or text that includes the information is relatively easy.


 * I would agree, however that page numbers out of a book are probably warranted, and since you posted your message above, I added page citations to Citation #2, which had been missing them. However, there is nothing wrong with using primary sources, as long as doing so adheres to WP:PSTS. Nightscream (talk) 21:04, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Legal cases from 2012
Two law suits from 2012 are hanging in the air. Both must be settled by now, but no outcome is reported. In any case two ten year old and obscure court cases are of no significance in the life of Harrison. Hence I am removing the text. Creuzbourg (talk) 00:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)


 * You stated as your rationale in your edit summary:


 * "Wikipedia shall at least not give half information, insinuatiing wrongdoing. If you want to keep it, report the outcome of suits!"


 * No, that is not the standard, and never has been. Wikipedia does not censor relevant, citation-supported content simply because with respect to legal proceedings, the outcome is not known. Wikipedia is a constant work in progress with no deadline, which means editors can constantly add, improve, or update it. This is impossible if we remove information from articles that is still in an incomplete stage. If you care that much about this point, then fix it! Do the research, and update those sections. Bottom line: Wikipedia does not blank content simply because it's incomplete. That's not constructive, and hardly in the spirit of the "teamwork" denoted by the barnstar on your user page. Nightscream (talk) 14:04, 26 January 2022 (UTC)