Talk:Talbot H. Green

California wife, Sarah

A note in the article states: "No real divorce was possible, since the marriage of Green and Mrs. Montgomery was not legal". I'm not sure how Sarah's marriage to him was dissolved, but, she probably would have needed some legal recognition of its dissolution or non-existence in order to marry someone else (admittedly it is also unclear when and where Sarah's first husband died). In the case of bigamy this normally would require an annulment though quite frequently the word 'divorce' is also used for an annulment. It is also possible she went the divorce route (on the grounds of abandonment) because that was easier to prove than that he was already married in a different state and under a different name when he married her. A divorce might also have made it easier for her to get his California property (and Geddes/Green does seem to have given her some of his property which is why she ended up owning a chunk of what is now Palo Alto). Unfortunately whatever method, the court records were almost certainly destroyed in the 1906 San Francisco earthquake/fire (there might be newspaper reports). The note itself may not be appropriate for this article unless there is a reliable source that has stated that for this particular marriage. Erp (talk) 04:30, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

• Hello Erp, thank you for your concern. This statement came from the reliable source - John Adam Hussey, New Light upon Talbot H. Green: As Revealed by His Own Letters and Other Sources, page 60. However, it was more of Hussey's opinion than a legal statement. I'm not sure if today's dissolution rules are applicable to the 19th century. Moreover, Sarah's first husband sailed to Hawaii and never came back, so her situation was questionable in the first place.Jacob0790 (talk) 17:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

  Yes, both might have been entering second marriages without the first ones having properly ended. However Sarah might have had evidence. If her first husband had died and was known to have died the evidence may have disappeared in the decades between then and now. I did try hunting down the history of the law on annulments in California and had little luck. Erp (talk) 02:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

  It isn't listed as a ref for the note. Erp (talk) 02:19, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 15:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that one of the streets in San Francisco is named after a man who was using a false identity?

• Source: Hussey, John Adam (March 1939). New Light upon Talbot H. Green: As Revealed by His Own Letters and Other Sources. University of California Press.

• Reviewed:

Created by Jacob0790 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Jacob0790 (talk) 20:23, 3 June 2024 (UTC).

• I note that at the time the street was named (circa 1850) it was not known to the people of San Francisco that Green was using a false identity. Might want to adjust the verb tense to reflect that. For instance "after a man who was using a false identity?" Erp (talk) 00:31, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Makes sense, Erp. Thanks, Jacob0790 (talk) 00:38, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
    • I wonder if giving a tiny bit more detail might help. "that Green Street in San Francisco is named after a respected local businessman who was using a false identity to evade justice?". Erp (talk) 03:09, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
      • I believe it's up to reviewers. They will definitely take it in consideration Jacob0790 (talk) 22:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

@Jacob0790: Article is long enough and submitted same day as DYK submission. The hook is very interesting and well-sourced, though I would word it slightly differently [see below]. The article is neutral, presentable, and well-sourced. No QPQ needed. Please let me know if you accept my rewording:

ALT1: ... that a street in San Francisco was named after a man that was using a false identity?
Kimikel (talk) 00:39, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

ALT2: ... that a street in San Francisco was named after a man who was using a false identity?

Thanks, Erp and Kimikel!
Jacob0790 (talk) 01:05, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Approving ALT2. Thank you for your submission Jacob0790! Kimikel (talk) 01:22, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Green street when named?

I couldn't find a good secondary source for when Green Street was named. However the 1850 City Directory (Kimball, Charles Proctor (1850). The San Francisco City Directory. Montgomery Street, San Francisco: Journal of Commerce Press.), which is before he was found out, has "Green Street" as a street name. The first mention in the Daily Alta California is 28 March 1850. Erp (talk) 03:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

• Thanks, Erp. Added a note. Jacob0790 (talk) 02:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Missing source

@Jacob0790 we're missing bibliographic details for Larkin 1854 (citations 23, 51, 52, etc.) Could you add it to the bibliography or fix the sfns? Thanks! Wham2001 (talk) 00:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Added to the bibliography and fixed the sfns. Thanks, Jacob0790 (talk) 01:21, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Wham2001 (talk) 01:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)