Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:15, 18 November 2008

Biography Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Comment

• After taking a close look at the young gels in the picture, I really don't think they had too much to worry about. Except maybe from gentlemen, who having imbibed too much alcohol, lacked their normal discretion. RMHED (talk) 00:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

You, young man, are quite clearly a slick, dandified cake eater - and more than likely a glossy lounge lizard. Catherine de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 22:57, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Compliments will get you nowhere M'lady, now stop your outrageous flirting, Miss Reighly would not approve. RMHED (talk) 02:59, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Query

Just out of curiosity, how much of the information in this article is actually true? --Elonka 21:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

What a silly question, are you ashamed of your sex? Well I am ashamed of you, for thinking such a thing. What a charming study Mr Hochman has just uploaded of Miss Reighly, it reminds me of myself, just after my cosmetic dental surgery. - As for you Ms Elonka, I would change that attitude if I were you, men don't like a woman with an opinion, you don't want to stay on the shelf for ever do you? Catherine de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 22:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I have nothing to do with the poster immediately above. The Shorpy reference has a comment that points to an article in "The Post, Feb 28, 1923" (Washington Post?). The picture I uploaded came from the Library of Congress. Notability has not been established yet, but there are signs that sources may exist. Jehochman 22:59, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if this article will survive. She is mentioned in a couple of websites (saying almost identical things), but it seems to me likely that one would need to violate WP:NOR to verify this woman's notability if not her existence. One is also mildly suspicious of a hoax, because of the mocking humor in it (an exceptionally ugly woman forming an anti-flirting club). Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 07:49, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

That is the typical response one would expect from a man, I would have expected better from a clergyman too, Deacon. Women of Misplaced Pages, rise up from your chains and "vote de Burgh." Catherine de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 08:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

"Fleeting mentions" from oh, places like the Library of Congress.... Yeah, we need her on a "real" website. As for her looks, all I can say is the this is one of the stupidest things I have ever read. In the era before orthodonture, her teeth were crooked, and that makes her "ugly?" Good grief! There was life before Maxim, you know, and there are testimonials on Shorpy to people who knew her as an elderly woman who attested to her wit and energy. I wonder what would happen if anyone actually researched the cultural history of 1928? I wonder what would happen if anyone around here got interested in education? Fewer cavils like this? Perhaps. Utgard Loki (talk) 12:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Was her movement satirical? The question is legitimate, but it seems to not be ironic. 1928 was a time of citizen committees for all sorts of reforms of public morals. Alice Reighly lived in a wealthy part of Washington, DC. She would get a college education and professional training. So, was she banding together with her socialite friends and making a witty but serious movement about how men in motorcars were becoming a pest? If one looks at silent films from the era, one sees the motorcar as something akin to a license to snag, and the problem of boys in cars making catcalls goes well into the 1950's. When a technology is new, it draws such citizen protests that later turn into laws. This is a year before the crash, at the height of the "roar" in the roaring 20's. Given the evidence from the LOC for the provenance of the photograph, the contemporary autograph of the rules of the group, verification is solid. Significance may not be -- that's for a wider audience to consider -- but "is it true" is the question of someone either too lazy to read the article itself or to check the sources given. Utgard Loki (talk) 12:47, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Utgard, teeth weren't that bad back then. ;) Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:09, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

• I am quite convinced that Miss Reilly was an upstanding and worthy member of Washington society - who was making a admirable stand on behalf of her community and sisters. Only Americans have this carniverous pre-occupation with teeth, which is why they all look alike in the dark. Naturally, I myself have quite perfect teeth Image:CdeB2.jpg, but had I not, as a member of the British aristocracy I would have left them to remain as the good Lord intended. "Au natural" is always best.Catherine de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 14:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

And there was me thinking it was mainly warfare that killed off all those aristocratic families. ;) Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposal

As this article is more about the Anti flirt club than about Ms Reighly, I would like to suggest that the article be renamed accordingly, with perhaps a redirect from Alice Reighly? However I'm concerned that there may be an element of the fake about this, we are currently relying on sources quoted in some sort of blog so I've checked with the Washington Post archive and while I wasn't able to access the Feb 28, 1923 issue I got zero hits for a search on "anti flirt club". Of course its possible that the post archive is as yet incomplete or not fully indexed, does anyone have access to a microfiche copy of its archive? Also I don't know American papers of the 30s well enough to know if the Post then necessarily meant the Washington Post... PS I searched for the 1923 date referred to in the article, not sure where the 1928 angle came from. ϢereSpielChequers 13:03, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

If more sources can be located, I would support a move to Anti-Flirt Club. If not, or in the meantime, I recommend userfying this in the creator's userspace. The account Catherine de Burgh (talk · contribs) seems to be mostly a joke account (check the history of the userpage), which adds further suspicion to the basis of this article. I also agree that we should not be using comments in blog posts as sources. A Washington Post article may or may not exist, but other messages are clearly contradictory. One says she was married, another says she wasn't, etc. Bottom line, if Catherine de Burgh wants to be having a bit of fun with the encyclopedia, that's fine, but keep it on a userpage. Please don't muck around with article space. --Elonka 17:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

No, no, no , no if you people are so ignorant of your own (admiteddly small) heritage then it is up to me a child of the British Empire to improve your knowledge. Miss Reighly is an important, if little know, figure in the history of American suffrage, right up there with poor dear Alva (a very late and close friend) and don't refer to me as a joke dear, not when it's you wearing the evening jewelery with a daytime jacket. Learn and appreciate your heritage my dear. Catherine de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 19:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

• Unassessed biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles