Talk:Harry Reichenbach

Lions

I'm concerned that much of this article is backed up by puff pieces and self-promotion. The article about September Morn is controverted elsewhere. The line about releasing apes and lions in hotels is obvious nonsense; you don't think anyone would have objected? http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?query=Lions&srchst=p&d=&o=&v=&c=&sort=closest&n=10&dp=0&daterange=period&year1=1918&mon1=01&day1=01&year2=1918&mon2=12&day2=31&frow=0 is a list of all New York Times articles in 1918 that come up with search word lions; I don't see any articles about this. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9805E3DF143AEE32A25756C2A9639C946195D6CF&scp=7&sq=Lions+tarzan&st=p is an article establishing the existence of Thomas R. Zann in the Hotel Bellclaire with a lion; surely lions roaming around hotels would be bigger news. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9C0CE4DD113FE433A2575BC1A9649C946996D6CF&scp=5&sq=apes&st=p is an article about one ape escaping (not Reichenbach related), so it'd get some ink somewhere.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:52, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I think that the ape escaping in the Knickerbocker was indeed Reichenbach related. In 1926, an article in the Harvard Crimson, online at http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1926/1/20/hoaxity-hoax-pit-is-perhaps-inevitable/ refers to a recent article by Reichenbach in Liberty, in which Reichenbach claims responsibility for "releasing a live ape named Prince Charley in the vestibule of the Hotel Knickerbocker". The NY Times article says the released ape/chimpanzee was named Prince Charles. An article about the ape/chimpanzee in the New York Sun a few days earlier reported the ape/chimpanzee named Prince Charles "... is starring in 'Tarzan of the Apes'..." http://www.fultonhistory.com/Newspaper%209/New%20York%20NY%20Sun/New%20York%20NY%20Sun%201918%20%20Grayscale/New%20York%20NY%20Sun%201918%20%20Grayscale%20-%201809.pdf#xml=http://www.fultonhistory.com/dtSearch/dtisapi6.dll?cmd=getpdfhits&u=ffffffffcfe001f8&DocId=3285212&Index=Z%3a%5cIndex%20O%2dG%2dT&HitCount=5&hits=67+68+59c+26e0+26e6+&SearchForm=C%3a%5cinetpub%5cwwwroot%5cFulton%5fNew%5fform%2ehtml&.pdf So it seems to have Reichenbach's fingerprints on it, Reichbach claimed to have been responsible, and published obits stated that Reichenbach did it. http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1917&dat=19310704&id=k1ohAAAAIBAJ&sjid=q4UFAAAAIBAJ&pg=914,429575

But I agree that too much of main article is unscholarly.Pikabruce (talk) 18:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)