Talk:Salem witchcraft trial (1878)

Title
I'd like to move this to Salem witchcraft trial (1878), following sources such as Caroline Fraser in God's Perfect Child (1999). Very few sources (that I can see) call it the Ipswich witchcraft trial, and many of those have taken it from this article. Does anyone mind if I move it? SlimVirgin (talk) 16:29, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * A Google books search shows no mention of a "second Salem witchcraft trial" or its variations. There is only one reference to "Ipswich witchcraft trial" and its variations (Maggi Smith-Dalton, A History of Spiritualism and the Occult in Salem: The Rise of Witch City, p. 146).  I can find just three to "Salem witchcraft trial of 1878" or variations thereof (Ruth A. Tucker, Another Gospel: Cults, Alternative Religions, and the New Age Movement, p. 159; Robert Peel, Mary Baker Eddy: the Concord Years, 1889-1908: A Chronology, p. 40; Louise A. Smith, Mary Baker Eddy: Discoverer and Founder of Christian Science, p. 75). Based on this limited information, I see no reason not to change it. - Tim1965 (talk) 21:11, 30 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. There's also Caroline Fraser, God's Perfect Child, Metropolitan Books, 1999, p. 69; she describes it as "the case that came be known as the Salem Witchcraft Trial of 1878." I'll go ahead and make the move. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:14, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Converted footnotes to use templates that link to the bibliography.
I've changed the bibliography to use the Cite book-templates, and changed the footnotes to use the harvnb template. This makes it possible for the reader of the article to click the footnote and be taken directly to the relevant spot in the bibliography. Should anyone wish to use this in future articles or help change other articles where the footnotes are plaintext, read Help:Shortened footnotes. Respectfully, InsaneHacker (💬) 14:39, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. - Tim1965 (talk) 13:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

This is ridiculous.
This is a dismissed civil case. Not even a trial. A crazy lady walked in to court and her accusation was dismissed by the court. It was a chuckle story taken with a wink back then. The "references" are a few local books by authors of no note. Calling this a witch trial on that basis is like citing bigfoot as verified by cable TV presentations. This should be labelled as an "Ipswitch witch trial" IN QUOTES to make clear it is a historic reference to a fanciful story. And one about a crazy lady not accusing anyone of being a witch, but rather drawing upon the Christian Scientist set of beliefs that would allow mental powers to affect health of others.

Just labeling it a Salem witch trial with a date in parentheses is a cute thing for schoolboys to do. But it makes it impossible to take this wiki seriously. 162.154.248.143 (talk) 13:55, 5 February 2024 (UTC)