Template:Did you know nominations/Elizabeth Hussey

From blackwiki
< Template:Did you know nominations
Revision as of 15:30, 29 December 2013 by imported>Yoninah (r)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Elizabeth Hussey

Created by NinaGreen (talk). Self nominated at 00:11, 12 December 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough, long enough, no close paraphrasing seen in online sources. Hook fact is cited inline and hook ref verified. QPQ done. The only question I have about this page is its title. She may have been born Elizabeth Hussey, but by what name is she most widely known? It would seem to be Elizabeth Crane. Moreover, per WP:MOS style, she should be referred to as "Crane" (or, in later paragraphs, "Carlton") rather than her full name from the second mention onwards. Yoninah (talk) 19:42, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • I wasn't aware of the WP:MOS requirement that people should be referred to only by their surnames from the second mention onwards. Could you direct me to it? I looked for it at WP:MOS just now, but it's a huge page and I couldn't find it. NinaGreen (talk) 20:04, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks; I've fixed them. NinaGreen (talk) 21:28, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • I've changed all the ones which can be changed without confusing readers as to who is meant. I'm afraid I don't know what you mean by 'the alternating surnames are confusing'. The surnames in the article don't alternate; they follow in sequence. She was born Elizabeth Hussey, became Elizabeth Crane at her first marriage, and Elizabeth Carleton at her second marriage. I don't think it's best to move the article. She was Elizabeth Crane when the first of the Marprelate tracts was printed, but was prosecuted for her part in the printing as Elizabeth Carleton, so I think it's best simply to title the article with her maiden name, particularly since she came from the Hussey family, which was very well known at the time on its own. Hope this all helps, and the nomination can be moved along. NinaGreen (talk) 23:14, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Oh dear me, no, Yoninah, that would be a frightful anachronism. Even now, the notion of women using earlier and later surnames together is overwhelmingly a North American one, but no one anywhere in the English-speaking world did such a thing (except when her husband added her surname to his) until hundreds of years after Elizabeth Hussey's time. And the Google searches you are relying on tell us nothing about the name or names used for her in reliable sources. I do not see what is troubling you, and indeed you make a nonsense of your own logic, because this lady's "commonname" is certainly not "Elizabeth Crane Carleton". Moonraker (talk) 15:17, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • I brought up this discussion when looking at the article and seeing all the "Elizabeth Hussey"'s, "Elizabeth Crane"'s, and "Elizabeth Carleton"'s inserted in the text to designate the subject at different periods of her life. It would be far better to call her Elizabeth Crane, which appears to fit the bulk of sources, and refer to her as "Crane" throughout per WP:SURNAME. Yoninah (talk) 15:30, 29 December 2013 (UTC)