Talk:Titus Billings

Untitled

I did a Google search on Titus Billings and found nothing of general interest. His interest even to Latter Day Saints appears to be genealogical. Did I miss something? If so, what is it? TECannon 13:56, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

He held a number of second-tier leadership positions in the very early church and is mentioned in the Church History material in the LDS Doctrine and Covenants (63:39). Prior to becoming a Mormon, he was involved in a utopian commune in Ohio, which should be included here. See Isaac Morley. WBardwin 10:53, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Home

This commentary was added to the article text itself; instead it should have been added to this talk page, so moved here.--208.81.184.4 (talk) 16:23, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

There is no evidence that the home pictured above is the Billings home. (Titus lived on block 97 according to "The Church Book", a record of property ownership kept by the early Church officials. The pictured home is located in block 98. Authors are relying on undocumented local heresay without adequate research.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notso Fast 53 (talk • contribs) 14:35, 12 September 2013‎

I have cited the image, it is clearly the home of Billings. See:

"Manti City Walking Tour" (pdf). Manti, Utah: Sanpete County Visitors' Bureau. Retrieved September 12, 2013. 26. Titus Billings home, 301 n. 100e. built in 1860, this pioneer home is owned by Jim and Shannon Miller. it has been restored and is practically unaltered from the original building

Additionally you can enter the address provided by the Sanpete County Visitors' Bureau and look at the Building here. Unless User:Notso Fast 53 can cite something to disprove the Sanpete County Visitors' Bureau I think the image is correctly titled.--ARTEST4ECHO (^talk/_contribs) 20:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

This commentary was added to the my talk page, when it should have been added to this talk page, so I moved here. --ARTEST4ECHO (^talk/_contribs) 15:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
HELLO ARTEST4ECHO I AM RESPONDING TO YOUR COMMENTS REGARDING THE HOME PICTURED IN THE TITUS BILLINGS ARTICLE ON WIKIPEDIA AND WOULD OFFER THE FOLLOWING:

The home pictured on the Tutus Billings Wikipedia page is not the Titus Billings home and is not titled correctly.

It was the home of Robert and Elizabeth Johnson as is evidenced by the State of Utah/National Register of Historic Places placard on the front door. The placement of the placard required extensive research to document the provenance of the home.

A) I am not sure how to send you a copy of the record but will happily supply it: <ref>CHURCH BOOK OF RECORDS</ref> This is a copy of the handwritten record kept by church officials before Sanpete County existed, is on file with the county, and is the basis from which the beginning ownership records of Manti City can be searched. The record shows that Isaac Morley owned all of block 98 where the house is was subsequently built and stands today. Titus Billings and a son owned lots in block 97. There stand two antique homes on each of those lots. One is directly across the street to the west, the other is across the street to the west and north at the end of the block. The confusion about the locations can be straightened out if these records would have been inspected, facts would have been checked or any of the authors would have knocked on the door and asked.

B) There is a woman in town who is a wealth of information and is highly respected named Jane Braithwaite. I started my research with her as well. She was unable to provide any documentation of the Titus Billings ownership claim. I moved on and was able to locate the "CHURCH BOOK OF RECORDS" elsewhere. The picture appearing in the Wikipedia was taken by a Titus Billings relative who did not knock on the door either.

C) Mark Lance Georgell wrote the George Pierce Billings family history. The home is pictured in his book as the home of Titus Billings. I contacted him after several interested family members came to the door with his book and showed me the photo he included in it. I contacted him to inquire about the documentation for the claim. He reported that he relied on Jane Braithwaite's advice, did not research it himself or do any fact checking. i asked him why he would publish undocumented claims and he replied: I don't know, I just thought she knew.

D) THE MANTI CITY WALKING TOUR IS INCORRECT. It was in fact published and then republished by the Sanpete County Economic Development office with incorrect information in spite of my request for it to be updated. I have asked them to change the brochure now for the third time. They are tight on funds and have agreed to correct it when they reprint.

E) THE ADDRESS SHOWN IS INCORRECT. County Property records show the correct address as 103 East 300 North. This is where mail is delivered. (There are two front doors - one facing west and one facing north. The 301 North 100 East address is not marked and mail is not delivered there.) Utah addresses are largely based on the grid system. Each address is a combination of two coordinates: one measures the distance North or South from the midpoint of the city and the other measures the distance East or West from the midpoint. Using the coordinates, the view you show in the map does show the correct building, but is not the official address used by the post office.

F) SANPETE COUNTY REFERENCED THE INCORRECT WALKING TOUR INFORMATION - The office relied on the incorrect information without fact checking it.

G) SANPETE COUNTY IS THE SECOND POOREST COUNTY IN THE STATE OF UTAH. Web masters do not have the resources to check everything they put on their pages they just hope it is correct.

H) THE INCORRECT INFORMATION JUST WHIRLS AROUND AND AROUND, GETTING BIGGER AND BIGGER WHEN IN REALITY EACH AND EVERY SOURCE CITED, COMES BACK TO THAT ONE WOMAN WHO HAS NOTHING, BLESS HER HEART.

Perhaps you can help me make the corrections necessary. Ideally the home should not appear at all on the Titus Billings page but I hesitated to delete it hoping someone like you would appear. And you did. Thank you. Notso Fast 53 (talk) 04:03, 13 September 2013 (UTC)Notso Fast 53 (talk) 04:03, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't have time right now to go into detail, but what you need to know us the you seem to not understand how Wikipedia works. Read WP:NOTTRUTH. Even if what you claim is 100 percent true, it doesn't matter. The secondary source shows that the image is correctly described. If you can show that the source is not reliable, which usually requires you to prove some kind of bias, then you could have a case, but you just saying "There poor and they are wrong" doesn't cut it per Wikipedia rules. You have to show that they are not reliable. It's a common mistake that new editors make, assuming that just because they are positive that a reference is wrong, that Wikipedia should remove the statement. I will address the more on Monday--ARTEST4ECHO (^talk/_contribs) 17:04, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely I don't know the ins and outs of Wikipedia, hence the discussion. I would like to upload a primary source so you can disregard the secondary source. I indicated that I did not know how to send a file showing the church record - this question was not addressed in your response. Why would a secondary source be accepted when a primary source is available? The logic does not wash. In addition, how would I upload a file from the County addressing this error which would show the source as unreliable?

I read your note regarding identifying sources and note this portion: "Contentious material about living persons (or recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." Consider this: on the very same website, www.sanpete.com where you sourced the Manti City Walking Tour, the county lists the National Register homes. The Robert and Elizabeth Johnson home is listed here: http://sanpete.com/businesses/show/2063-robert-elizabeth-johnson-home. There is clearly contention regarding this photo - it should be removed because it was poorly sourced.

In addition, the article you reference WP:NOTTRUTH. The discussion contains this line: "This means that the absolute minimum standard for including information in Wikipedia is verifiability. If the information is not verifiable, you must not include it under any circumstances." I am making a case for the fact that this picture is not verifiable. It is listed with two separate names on the same website. Looking at the photo in reverse, why isn't the poster, Mr. Billings being questioned? Why do we accept his POV when there was/is absolutely NO effort to validate on his part? There is clearly contention regarding this photo - it should be removed because it cannot be verified.

My points about the webmasters being poor and not fact checking was tertiary information, I realize that. The material was not presented as primary or secondary, just background information. In focusing on those comments, inserted to give you the entire situation, my point was missed entirely: How do I get the file where ever it needs to go so as to show that the source is incorrect?

Notso Fast 53 (talk) 04:52, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

My point was, you haven't supplied any verifiability sources yourself that back up any of your claims, while have cited at least two governments source, which are verifiable, that say it is. I have no personal beef here. I don't want a bad image on that page any more than any other person, however, it cannot be done based only on your says so, per WP:NOTTRUTH.

Looking threw your lists

Item A: What "CHURCH BOOK OF RECORDS"? You say it is on "record". Then cite it. That is a good place to start. If it says that this is the incorrect location, great! However, you don't provide any links to this "CHURCH BOOK OF RECORDS", you haven't uploaded to wikisource, nothing. Saying it's in the "CHURCH BOOK OF RECORDS" isn't citing the source. However, even then, it may not prove that this isn't the house, as the US government and Sanpete County say it is.

Item B & C: This has nothing to do with the issue at hand. The image is cited twice now. It is irreverent if Jane Braithwaite, Mark Lance Georgell, or Titus Billings relative says it's the Billing home, because the US Government and Sanpete County say it is and they are not bias. The image is properly sourced. If it was just Jane Braithwaite, Mark Lance Georgell, or Titus Billings relative then yes, there would be possible conflicts of issues here, but that isn't the case.

Item D & E: Again, just you saying that "Sanpete County Economic Development office" agrees with me that the information is wrong and "the Post Office say the address is wrong", doesn't cut it. You have to be able to cite the claims you make. You haven't done that here.

Item F & G: So what if "Sanpete County is the Second Poorest County In The State Of Utah". That doesn't make them unreliable. Your claims still are not verifiable, while the opposite claims are verifiable. Being Poor doesn't make you unreliable any more then being rich make you reliable.

Item H: Cite your claim. Just because "Information just whirls around and around" that doesn’t make it incorrect. The information that Obama is the President of the United States whirls around and around, and that doesn’t make it untrue. You have to supply a verifiable source that can be cited.

Regarding: Your suggestion that "unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.", it isn't unsourced or poorly sourced. It is properly sourced, so this doesn't apply. There are TWO sources, the County and the US government. You haven't give shown that either of these are "poorly sourced" other then your own opinion.

Regarding, "This means that the absolute minimum standard for including information in Wikipedia is verifiability. If the information is not verifiable, you must not include it under any circumstances." - I have sourced the image twice and the US Register is verifiable, even if Sanpete County isn't, which I don't agree.

Regarding: "Looking at the photo in reverse, why isn't the poster, Mr. Billings being questioned? Why do we accept his POV when there was/is absolutely NO effort to validate on his part? There is clearly contention regarding this photo - it should be removed because it cannot be verified." I have verified it, twice. All your arguments are biased on a personal belief that the sources are not good, but you have not supplied anything backing that up. If I had found sources that said that you were correct, I would have been the first to say that it should be removed. I have listed for deletion hundreds of images that were not what they claimed to be. That is why I went out and looked for sources, and found them. It is now your job to cite sources that says something else. However, even then, all that shows is that this is now the "Disputed<REF> Billings family pioneer home<REF><REF>". The image is still verifiable so it should stay on the page, with your source the reference on the word Disputed, and the other two at the end.

Regarding: Your claim that "State of Utah/National Register of Historic Places placard on the front door." shows it is not the Billing home, great, cite it. This is a good place to start to show you are correct. Until then, again it's just your word.

It seems to me that you have nothing but your own beliefs to back up your claim. You have hinted to some things that would back you up, but you haven't supplied a verifiable source to your claims yet. I feel like we're being told, "Don't believe anyone else, because they are wrong, Believe me", when we have no idea who you are, if your bias, or even correct. How do we know you don't own the home you claim is the billing home and hope to make money on it selling tickets to enter it. We don't know you from Adam, which is why you have to cite your claims from a secondary source.

If you supply something, anything to back up your claim, besides your own belief, I am more than happy to look it over. Again, I have no personal beef here. All I know is that two source say you are wrong and all you can do is make claims that you can't cite.--ARTEST4ECHO (^talk/_contribs) 15:03, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

WOW! Billings/Houggard house (80003948) is across the street from the Robert Johnson house (80003949). They face each other. The US Government does NOT list the Robert Johnson house as the Billings/Houggard house, they are two separate listings. Please double check what you have just done. You are increasing the error. Notso Fast 53 (talk) 03:47, 17 September 2013 (UTC)Notso Fast 53Notso Fast 53 (talk) 03:47, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Notso Fast 53

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I am very interested in getting the proper image since I originally uploaded the house image to the wiki commons. While I am clearly a biased author, I am more interested in having correct information than having a pretty picture. You can see that I have gone to great lengths to cite all of the claims in the article. In addition to the cited documents that others have provided about the location of the Titus Billings family home, I have several unpublished maps that were provided by the Daughters of Utah Pioneers that indicate that the house in the picture is the correct house. It is possible that Mrs. Braithwaite has been the source of these though, so I would love to have better information. My understanding is that the Billings/Houggard house was the residence of Alfred Nelson and Deborah Patten. Alfred being the younger son of Titus as is listed in the article. When I took the photograph of the residence, I actually did approach the house and knocked on the door. The woman who answered seemed unknowledgeable about the history of the residence which was surprising to me given that it is on the register. I did see the plaque that you have mentioned and which can be seen but not read from the street view on google maps. My thinking at the time was that the Johnson family perhaps moved into the house after the Billings family moved to Provo. I have nothing at this time to vindicate that reasoning as I know nothing about the Johnson family. If the house in the picture is not the Billings home, are you suggesting that Titus Billings lived in the Alfred Nelson/Deborah Patten home? Where would you say that Titus and his family lived? I am willing to do the research that you have mentioned about the "Church Book" if you can help me find that information. I also approached the owner of the Alred Nelson Billings home across the street and the owner at the time pointed me to talk with Jane Braithwaite for information about the history of the residence. Best regards, --Modulok (talk) 09:35, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Dear Modulok, Thank you for responding to this discussion. I have tried to find you in the phone book to no avail so I appreciate your interest here. I could not find this page after my last post and just now stumbled on it as I am not a skilled or regular wikipedia user, so my apology in the delay in responding. Please see the following: The walking tour has been updated. If you click on the link you will see a reference to both the Billings/Houggard house @ #25 and the Robert Johnson house @ #26.

The Church book indicates that Titus owned much of the block. I think you are correct that the son lived in the house across the street. The best guess is that Titus lived in the stone home at the North end of the block on the opposite corner - 400 North. I have copies of the 'church book' and can put you in touch with the woman who is knowledgeable about the proper records that exist in Manti.

The provenance of the house does not show Titus Billings anywhere in the ownership documents. These documents are not on line but can be research at the Sanpete County recorder's office.

I have not seen the DUP maps. If they are locally sourced they will have the same problem that I referred to earlier in my frustrated comments.

All of the ownership records show that Robert Johnson owned the quarter acre on block 98 where the photographed house is located and Titus owned much of block 97. To my knowledge, the 'Church Book' is not on line so I am unable to source it but you can see it in the Sanpete County recorder's office.

The National Park Service page that if referenced is correctly labeled as the Billings Houggard house but that house is across the street from the house in the photograph. If you read the fine print in the NPS nomination you will see that the Billings Houggard house faces South. The house in the image faces west. I asked another user for help and he put the NPS reference in the article intimating that the Billings Houggard house was the same house as the Robert Johnson house. By doing this, he was trying to show me how wrong I was but instead, he confused the whole issue.

The google map reference is incorrect because it points to the Robert Johnson house instead of the Billings Houggard house. I think the reference should be removed but I have had trouble finding someone with patience to work with me.

Again, let's work this through. And thank you for writing.

Notso Fast 53 (talk) 07:13, 18 November 2013 (UTC) Notso Fast 53 (talk) 07:54, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Notso Fast 53, I have done more research on the topic that you have referenced and I am convinced that there is a sufficient amount of evidence that shows that the house pictured in the article was not the abode of Titus Billings. I will have to dig further to find out where he actually lived whether it was with Alfred in the Billings-Hougard house or some other place I don't know, but it seems like there is enough doubt in my mind to call the picture into conflict and thus not appropriate for the wiki page. If you would like to contact me in person, you can find my contact information on Facebook and my profile is public. I will change the article and hopefully in the future I will be able to add a new picture that is accurate and without controversy. Thanks for your research!

Regards, Modulok (talk) 23:48, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

References