Talk:Jean Parker

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Teblick in topic Reversion of change of birthplace.

»Two years later she gave birth to a son, Robert Lowery Hanks, an executive with the city of Los Angeles, California.«

Untitled edit

Quite a miracle giving birth to such a talented person who just starts working after right beeing born. I wonder what he did AFTER this modest beginning … —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.8.88.90 (talk) 00:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Reversion of change of birthplace. edit

I have reverted an edit that changed Parker's birthplace from Butte, Montana, to Deer Lodge, Montana. The source that immediately follows that part of the text clearly gives Butte, Montana, as her birthplace. If someone has a reference that supports some other place, that source needs to be provided. Eddie Blick (talk) 02:35, 10 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Teblick: I changed the birthplace to Butte a couple of years ago, which is indicated in both her obituaries by The Independent and The Guardian, but this has since been changed, presumably following the reversion you made that restored Butte as her birthplace. Some sources do indeed state she was born in Deer Lodge, but at this point is impossible to know for certain. Since I made my edit in 2018, there have been a variety of edits that have resulted in a messy patchwork job, including a sentence that stated that her birth name was "erroneously reported" as Luise Stephanie Zelinska; however, upon checking the corresponding source, it simply states she was born Lois Mae Green, and says nothing about any "erroneous" reporting of the Zelinska birthname. In any case, I've created an explanatory footnote highlighting the disputes among sources regarding the various details of Parker's birth: As of my writing this, the available sources suggest birth years of 1915 and 1916 (the D'Ambrosio book cited lists both 1915 and 1916 on the same page!), birthplaces of either Deer Lodge or Butte, Montana; and birth names of Lois Mae Green or Luise Stephanie Zelinska. I have indicated in the footnote which sources state which, and I think that is going to have to suffice for the time being. I urge editors to refrain from making changes to this as the cold, hard facts cannot be corroborated at this point given the disparities between the sources available. --Drown Soda (talk) 19:54, 9 June 2020 (UTC)Reply
Drown Soda, Thank you for your explanation here and for your addition of the explanatory note to the article. I know from my own research on various people that discrepancies and conflicts are sometimes found in checking old sources. I appreciate the way you have handled the situation. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:39, 10 June 2020 (UTC)Reply