Talk:Coretta Scott King/Archive 2

Question: Why does my article on Coretta keep getting deleted from "External Links"?

I posted it shortly after her death and linked in here. I recently noticed it missing and relinked it a few days ago, only to see it gone again tonight. Is there a process of approval I'm not following? The piece is (I think, and hope) well researched, passionate, and conscientous. All of the visual and text borrowing falls within fair use, and the sources are linked and referenced. Sorry if I'm betraying ignorance about Wikipedia etiquette here, or about anything else. For reference, the article is this: "You Can't Do All of It By Yourself" http://blogs.citypages.com/pscholtes/2006/02/coretta_scott_k.php Pete Scholtes, petescholtes "at" gmail.com (2/1/08)

Wikipedia does not consider blogs reliable sources. They are rarely, if ever used for article content, including external links. The Bookkeeper (_{of the Occult}) 08:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She's part Native American why isn't this stated in the article she not just African American

Hi! I really enjoy how the articles are very thorough most of the time it really helps with research, but how come none of her native american heritage is mentioned at all?? She even physically shows traits that are native american and not african american? So is this article being biased or has this fact been over looked as with many people who are classified as african americans. I looked the Black Indians article which has helped me understand some of these issues even better, and explains why so many of my friends look different physically. Thank You for your time.98.206.116.222 (talk) 06:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Information in articles has to be sourced to a reliable source, and so far no editor has come across a reliable source claiming such. Basing our opinion of her heritage on how she looked would be original research, so we cannot include the information on the basis of that opinion. If you'd like to include this information you'll need to find a reliable source that discusses it. Natalie (talk) 13:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well isn't that biased? You can write she's AFrican American but you can't write that she's also Native American? Why is it such a big fight to acknowledge a person's Native American heritage, but not their African? Isn't that unfair? I understand that she fought for civil rights but that doesn't mean she was all black, and what if she had more native heritage then black, would people get mad?98.206.116.222 (talk) 21:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter what the actual subject matter is - everything has to be documented with reliable sources. We can write that she's African American because that's supported by actual sources, but you haven't actually provided any evidence that King is actually part Native American, other than your personal assessment of her appearance. I can't see how this is biased or unfair at all - every claim has to be supported. Isn't that kind of the definition of fair? Natalie (talk) 22:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well like Natalie has stated it needs to be cited, and it is far more easier to find a source stating that a person is African American than to find one that talks about any other heritage they have. For example: Zoe Saldana is Dominican-American but because of her complection and the roles she has played in movies some people believe that she is African American when she has no African American ancestry, but if there was no references on her Dominican heritage the odds are someone would have put that she is African American. So to make things clear it isn't biased it just the plan simple fact that it is hard finding sources on a person's full heritage let alone Native American. If you have interest in African-Native American people check out Black Indians there are several notable people that are listed and it was hard just to get their ancestral history.Mcelite (talk) 02:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)mcelite[reply]

Clearly Mrs King identified herself as Black (or Negro), as did those around her. That fact is clearly significant given the events of her life. If there are verifiable sources documenting her ethnic background in more detail, or even notable writings describing her appearance as unusual, those may be worth a small mention. But even then, any analysis or speculation about the "meaning" of something which was not under consideration during her life would go well beyond the scope of an encyclopedia unless it became the subject of a notable public debate. --Dystopos (talk) 03:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism I can't remove

At the first paragraph it has the gibberish: "She is like the beautiful, lovely wife of Martin Luther King Jr."

I can't seem to see that in the "edit this page" section.

Could somebody remove this and explain here how they removed it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.182.91.94 (talk) 21:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relevance and speculation in "longevity" section

The inclusion of the "Longevity" section seems a bit irrelevant. Though she may have died younger than some members of her family, 78 is not a remarkably short lifetime. Even if it is deemed relevant to Caretta Scott King's page, it is entirely speculative. Longevity of a person is obviously a much more complicated issue than can be explained by stress and the ages of close relatives. I am worried that the section implies a stronger correlation between longevity and genetics than actually exists. I feel like a page on longevity in humans in general would be a more appropriate and well-equipped place to address this "nature vs. nurture" issue.

You are correct. I'm amazed it sat there for so long. I have removed it. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 22:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A comparison is never a bad thing. The emphasis is on the fact of her public life. Her parents did much physical work and lived to truly old ages (both were in their 90's at their deaths), alas, King did not enjoy longevity and in fact did not survive either parent by a full decade. Her siblings came from a similar gene pattern as she and both have attained a higher age and are in better health than she was. At 78, a person should have several years of productivity remaining which is what seems to me the reason her death was deemed premature. (UTC) 03:12, 31 January 2009

Except it's not just that. You are also inserting your opinion, "Her brother Obie is currently 78 and in better health than she was at the same age. Factors related to stress, along with her cancer probably contributed to her death at only 78." That needs a source and I can't really see why comparing the length of her life to others is anything but trivia. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 13:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is true (not opinion) her siblings are in better health than she was, and their ages are 78 and 83. That part should be deleted. However, it is unusual for parents to live to their 90's have an offspring that never smoked, drank or did drugs and was a vegan to not even reach her eighth decade. It would be one thing to compare the length of her life to a non-relative but all the people mentioned are close relatives. I find it highly unusual that she only reached 78 (the majority of people today live far longer) and do believe that the stresses and demands of public life contributed to her fairly short lifespan. 01:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not disagreeing about the ages. You can't say in the article that that it was stress and cancer that contributed to her death without quoting a source. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 09:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A person who dies at any age has a cause of death but it is more questionable the younger the person is at death. It is natural to wonder, especially when a person's parent lives from (1899-1998) and they only lived (1927-2006), its not unusual to ask what caused such a premature death and it deserves explanation. 01:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

That's fine but you need a source rather than an editors opinion. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 09:08, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was stated in many of her obituaries, it was stated by her children, plenty of sources are made starting from the time of her death on 30 January 2006. 11:20, 2 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.96.225.105 (talk)

Then it should be easy for you to source something saying that her children/relatives believe her death was caused by whatever they suggest. If you read through the article it's possible to speculate that the treatment give at the rehabilitation center in Mexico contributed to her death. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 07:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The center likely did contribute to her death. They did not seem to know what to do. Bernice King stated that her mother moaned and groaned (nothing was done for King during this time) for hours before her death. The doctor did not really want to see her to begin with. She ultimately died from cardio-respiratory failure. This goes to show that even today, accidental deaths occur due to indifference on the doctor's part. 00:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.217.180.55 (talk)

Content has been provided showing King's death was premature but has yet to be acknowledged. What does it take for one to believe a reliable, documented source? 12:33, 12 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.92.124.121 (talk)

Dubious text

I removed the following from the first paragraph:

... following Dr. King's death, Mrs. King was responsible for finding a new leader of the civil rights movement; when Josephine Baker and others turned down the leadership position, Mrs. King took on the mantle of leadership herself, remaining an important voice in American politics until her death in 2006 (Please note: There is absolutely no reference to Josephine Baker on page 363, the first page of the index, where "Baker" would appear, in Mrs. King's memoir, "My Life With Martin Luther King, Jr." New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1969. Nor is there any discussion whatsoever in her book of Mrs. King being "responsible for finding a new leader of the civil rights movement.").

It is not clear how this dispute should be resolved; but this talk page seems like a more appropriate venue for handling such issues. --Tenmei (talk) 13:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

The picture used in this article is a picture of coretta king

Date of Death

Coretta Scott King's date of passing is January 30, 2006, not August. Please correct this. 173.242.78.122 (talk) 16:58, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I'm not sure why the lead listed her death in August. The article correctly gave her death in January further down in the article.4meter4 (talk) 18:06, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT Equality - only one reference?

Are there more references than just the one reference in this section?
Bay Area Native (talk) 21:58, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious Quote Regarding JNF forrest

The article claims that Coretta Scott King's wrote a glowing endorsement of JNF's forest, planted in her honor. The glowing quote can be found on the JNF website.

This quote is clearly dubious in nature. According to JNF's site, the forest in question was planned and planted as a result of sections of forest which burned down in the Israel Lebanon War. The Israel-Lebanon war occurred in July/August of 2006. Coretta Scott King died in January of 2006. Hence there is absolutely no way she could have known about the forest being named after her, let alone comment on it. Poyani (talk) 18:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC) The materiel is sourced. JNF notified her of the *intention* to plant a forest before it was done, and later, they chose to plant that forest in an area that burned in the war — Preceding unsigned comment added by Top of the Tower (talk • contribs) 00:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Profile picture change

I've always been somewhat disappointed that we have chosen to use the current image all this time, when I think others would benefit the article greatly. I have no problem with the size, though it is small and does hamper in my opinion what is otherwise a very good article about a very wonderful person. I do believe that we should change the image, preferably to something that displayed her in her prime. I propose around the time Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. passed or prior to that. Justin —Preceding undated comment added 02:38, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dexter's age

The article says MLK died on Dexter's 45th birthday.

Syntax and Word Usage Problems

there are a lot of syntax and word usage problems in this long article. they can't be corrected by someone who does not know what word was intended. the author of this piece should correct them, they're distracting and confusing. Purejuice (talk) 07:42, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

==Might want to mention explicitly in the lede that she was married to MLK. You don't get a sense of it the way it is worded now.96.51.16.28 (talk) 02:56, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

99.38.233.74 Bad-faith edits to remove mentions of LGBT rights 12 May 2015

IP-address user made 2 bad-faith edits to the lead and infobox to remove mentions of support for LGBT rights.

05:24, 12 May 2015 Deceitful edit description of "Fixed typo" (-16 bytes) to remove mention of Gay rights in occupation in infobox

Differences link
Changed “Women's rights, ~~Gay rights,~~”

05:26, 12 May 2015 Deceitful edit description of "Fixed typo" (-62 bytes) to remove 2 mentions of LGBT rights work in 2nd paragraph

Differences link
Changed “Women's Movement ~~and the LGBT rights movement~~.”
Changed “opposition to apartheid ~~and advocacy for LGBT rights~~.”

The section "LGBT equality" and its refs clearly supports the deleted text sections, so I restored them.

I have no experience undoing vandalism, so I don't know if it should be reported somewhere—please inform if so.
— Mwr0 (talk) 04:57, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Coretta Scott King. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060210124941/http://www.ala.org:80/ala/emiert/corettascottkingbookaward/abouttheawarda/cskabout.htm to http://www.ala.org/ala/emiert/corettascottkingbookaward/abouttheawarda/cskabout.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:36, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people"

The quote "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people...", is dated 2003 here and uncited. Wikiquote dates it to 1998 and ascribes it to Reuters. Marnanel (talk) 13:34, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Coretta Scott King. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:07, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Coretta Scott King. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:38, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

re: Maternal Grandfather, Martin

I found the information regarding Coretta's Maternal Grandfather, Martin to be partially incorrect from my experience. Martin was not abandoned by his father, nor was he unacknowledged.

His father was Thomas McMurray of County Antrim, Ireland and came to the U.S. as a young man. Martin was born at a time later in his father's life, but still in the time of slavery. Thomas McMurray, who was employed as an Overseer, not slave-owner, claimed his son as his own, not wanting a child of his to be a slave, as the law would have it. Had he not done this, Martin would have become the property of Thomas' employer, the farmer who owned Martin's mother.

Thomas gave Martin his name (spelling it "McMurry" without the "a") and raised him to adolescence. Some years after the Emancipation, Martin's mother returned for him and Martin was asked if he wanted to go with his mother or stay with his father. His father told Martin that if he chose to go with his mother, that he (Thomas) would never see Martin again.

Martin chose to go with his mother. However, it is not certain that Martin never again saw his father.

This story was told by Martin to his first and oldest child, Emma McMurry, instilling a pride in his "Irishness" which she carried throughout her life. This, along with various customs, tales and information about Ireland which Martin learned as a result of being raised by his father Thomas, was also passed on.

SOURCE:

My paternal grandmother, Emma McMurry Jenkins.

Carol J. Jenkins (talk) 19:50, 24 February 2017 (UTC)Carol J. JenkinsCarol J. Jenkins (talk) 19:50, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How she was a leader

She took on the leadership of the struggle for racial equality herself after the death of her husband she wanted to continue his dreams .

Consistency problem with names

In this article, the last name "King" is sometimes used to refer to Coretta Scott King and sometimes to her husband, Martin Luther King Jr. Sometimes it is not clear which of them is being referred to, and sometimes it is only clear because of the pronouns used.

Here's an example of a sentence referring to Coretta Scott King as simply "King":

Two days after the integration of Montgomery's bus service, on December 23, a gunshot rang through the front door of the King home while King, her husband and Yolanda were asleep.

Here's an example of a sentence referring to her husband as simply "King":

King played the tape in her presence, along with Andrew Young, Ralph Abernathy and Joseph Lowery. Publicly, Mrs. King would say "I couldn't make much out of it, it was just a lot of mumbo-jumbo."

Here's an example of a sentence where it's not clear which of them is referred to:

A white man was reported by a lone witness to have walked halfway up to King's door and thrown something against the door before running back to his car and speeding off.

It should be clear by now that this is a problem — we cannot have two different people being referred to by the same name in the same article. However, it's not clear to me what to do about it. As far as I know, Wikipedia does not have a policy on this matter (please correct me if I am wrong!). [EDIT: We do have a policy, at MOS:SURNAME. It states, "After the initial mention, a person should generally be referred to by surname only – without an honorific prefix such as "Mr.", "Mrs.", or "Ms.", and without academic or professional prefixes like "Dr.", "Prof.", "Rev.", etc. – or may be referred to by a pronoun. ... Generally speaking, subjects should not otherwise be referred to by their given name."]

There are, I believe, several possible solutions to this problem:

We could refer to both people by their full names at all times. This might become awkward, but is perhaps most respectful.
We could refer to both people by their first name only, except upon introduction. This is somewhat disrespectful, but it is relatively common when talking about, for example, the Curies.
We could refer to Coretta Scott King as Mrs. King and Martin Luther King, Jr. as Dr. King. At times in the article, Coretta Scott King is referred to as Mrs. King, but I think that usually on Wikipedia, we do not use honorifics within articles, except within cases where those are the most notable names.
We could rewrite the article such that Coretta Scott King and only Coretta Scott King is referred to as simply "King." This seems like the most natural choice to me, since she is the subject of the article, but it breaks gendered conventions and might be confusing to the reader. It also raises the question of how to refer to Martin Luther King Jr.

Thoughts? Birdsinthewindow (talk) 03:02, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How was the life has a motherOn her

She had 4 kids 12.108.229.229 (talk) 00:58, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! You are correct that Coretta Scott King had four children. I am not sure what your question is. Would you mind clarifying? Birdsinthewindow (talk) 21:32, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

we arent sure where the grave is but all we know is she is by and loved by marten luther king jr

we arent sure where the grave is but all we know is she is by and loved by marten luther king jr 74.84.104.98 (talk) 20:32, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's very sweet! Just so you know, Coretta Scott King is buried at the King Center for Nonviolent Social Change. See Death and funeral of Coretta Scott King for more information. Birdsinthewindow (talk) 21:37, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

we are loved and worrieing about her

we are loved and worrieing about her 74.84.104.98 (talk) 20:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

we loved her!!!!!

we loved her!!!!! 74.84.104.98 (talk) 20:39, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

spelling mistake or am i stupid

The segment that states "She said that despite the Martin Luther King Jr. being away from his children at times,..." has the mistake of saying 'the' before MLK's name. Is this a mistake or is this fine? Drbulba2 (talk) 07:10, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]