This article was nominated for deletion on 12 February 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Cleanup 12-27-06
editI am not the original author, but came here as a part of the clean-up project to "fix" this article.
This article is notable despite only one reference source. I have checked the reality of the source book for which I found two online reviews, and I googled the authors who are a married wrting team published by credible companies, and whose books are available in the mainstream.
Definitely
editI realize this is simply anecdotal, but I grew up in Kings County, Nova Scotia and there is nothing controversial about this article. Definitely accurate as of 2007-07-02 and it was a major legal and moral scare in Nova Scotia/Eastern Canada during the 1980s. It's too bad, but I am not aware of much reference information on this case or I would try to improve the article. Gabe 23:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I was contracting in Halifax at that time. There absolutely were newspaper stories that somebody with access to the Halifax library would be able to find. --BenBurch (talk) 03:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
"Mythbusting"
editThe "Mythbusting" section has no references or sources, and appears to be a personal opinion based on no facts whatsoever. It seems to be simply a rant written by someone who heard from someone who was told that this story was a conspiracy theory. I am therefore removing it. Please voice any objections, though I cannot believe there will be any. Wikipedia is not for opinions and personal statements. It is a reference tool, not a blog. Thank you. 72.68.49.151 (talk) 01:04, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
NPOV
editThis article does not appear to have a neutral point of view. I have added a notifaction towards this. 125.238.245.133 (talk) 04:10, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- You say it's not NPOV but you don't give any specifics or share what your exact concerns are. Burpelson AFB (talk) 00:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
why "clan"?
editWhy are they called a "clan" rather than just a family? They lived in 2 shacks, according to the article. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 20:44, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Richardson mcphillips: This is a guess. I could be wrong. But the prose here seems like it was deliberately constructed to leave wiggle room. Unless I'm missing something, it's remotely possible that some people involved in this case were not related. If anybody involved isn't related to the Golers, "family" would be wrong but "clan" would still work. 66.213.126.195 (talk) 20:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- thanks. I suppose in-laws might stretch it. I thought the word "clan" made it sound a bit Appalachian. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 21:39, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Cruise & Griffith use the term "clan" in their book On South Mountain to describe the Golers and several other extended families. The region had numerous families who lived in isolation and were infamous for being considered low-class, filthy, highly suspicious of outsiders, etc ... the living definition of "clannish". ZeppoShemp (talk) 22:21, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Ancestry section to be removed ?
editI see no reason to single out one ancestor, except for mentioning his Afro-american origin. --Japarthur (talk) 13:10, 3 February 2017 (UTC)