Talk:Wanda Gág/Archive 1

Archive 1

Accurate name: Wanda Gág

That's her correct and official name, as appears on her book covers. --Húsönd 20:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

That is not how it's spelled here in Minnesota, where she lived. See the website for her home, for example, an historic site. Jonathunder 20:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Husond, even if that true on some book cover, it isn't determinative of the issue.

Furthermore, was there any evidence whatsoever of what any book cover says when I reverted the undiscussed, unreferenced move by User:Tevildo? A: No, there was not.

Is there any evidence now in the article as to how her name is spelled on book covers? A: No, there was is not.

Is there any citation to any reliable source here on the talk page to back up Husond's claims that this is how it appears on book covers? A: No, there was is not.

Q.E.D. Gene Nygaard 01:44, 10 March 2007 (UTC) Corrected tense with strikeouts 04:42, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

OTOH, there is, and was, clear evidence of how the Wanda Gag House spells its name. Gene Nygaard 01:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

It is a distinct possibility that people doing websites do not know how to produce diacritic marks correctly. The US National Gallery of Art [1] and the Library of Congress [2] both show the diacritic, as do most images of book covers, as previously mentioned. As well, the Wikipedia article on her father uses the diacritic throughout and there seems to be no controversy there. Just further sources to ponder. Ryanjunk 00:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I currently don't have the means to scan the book cover, but I have it here in my hands and there is definitely a diacritic: Wanda Gág. Furthermore, this is how I have always seen the name spelled in literature referencing this author. I agree with Ryanjunk, some people may drop the diacritic because they don't know how to mark it correctly, but on Wikipedia the article should bear the diacritic (providing there are redirects in place at Wanda Gag, and there are). --woggly 10:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

The name issue has resurfaced: Wanda added the ´ over the a in Gág after she went to New York. Neither of her parents ever used the accent mark, all of her biographies are consistent on this. I understand the desire to be consistent, but the corrections by Gobonobo are in error. Further complicating matters, the Wanda Gág House now uses the diacritic mark, albeit inconsistently. I recommend checking any of the reference titles concerning Anton Gag before reverting.Dktrfz (talk) 17:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Question???

When you write GAG in the Wikepedia search engine and don't use the accent mark - will the page still come up? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.80.168.143 (talk • contribs).

Yes. Doing that will redirect your result to this page.--Húsönd 02:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation

I've added a copyvio tag because several paragraphs seem to have been lifted directly from this website. The material was added during this edit by Sfphotocraft in November 2006. As best I can tell, that material was already on that website by November 2006. See the Internet Archive logs for the site here. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 14:50, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Why don't we just delete the copyviolations and start over with a smaller article, starting here [3]?. We can add material later...Modernist (talk) 15:24, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Done...Modernist (talk) 22:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Removed some content...

While adding and footnoting info I had to remove this "She considered herself a feminist and advocate of free love in the 1920s." because I didn't find a citation for it in any of my books. Feel free to add it back if you have one.Tlqk56 (talk) 05:00, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

The Cech source appears to be inaccurate on several accounts, most notably date of her marriage. It is an older reference, possibly "sanitized" for children? The Winnan book was written after her adult diaries were made available, it contains entries in Gág's own writing. Numerous references to feminism are made by Gág in Growing Pains, her adult diaries also contain numerous references to open sexual relationships. Much of the newest material needs citations, it reads like opinion.Dktrfz (talk) 03:13, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Cech may be wrong, but it was published in 1983, as the reference says, long after her death, and is for adults. I don't question the feminism facts, or any others. I simply don't have citations for them. Feel free to put them in and cite them, as I said above. I cited every fact in the article that I added, except for the one I missed when I split the paragraph differently. Thanks for noting that. Since WP doesn't allow writings by the person themselves as support for facts, her diaries don't help there. But I'm not interested in fighting over anything, only improving the article, and I've used all my current sources so I'm finished unless I find something new. (The citation for "There was a movement among educators at the time against fairy tales." follows it. So I removed that tag. It is: Cech, pg. 187.)Tlqk56 (talk) 05:12, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

It's definitely getting better but the phrase "Some people felt" is just a bunch of weasel words. Which people? Which movement? I still have many doubts about the Gale material. It is not from a dedicated biographer. I will be checking other "facts" derived from those references. The wedding date mistake was more than egregious, it was positively disingenuous. The current article has very little on her artistic achievements. It may be time to create separate sections on the different parts of Wanda's interesting and complex life - early years, art school, New York scene, printmaking, children's books, legacy, etc, which would allow a more balanced picture. If you haven't already, read Wanda's Growing Pains, Karen Nelson Hoyle's bio and the Winnan book. Dktrfz (talk) 02:07, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

New Sections

Starting to add new sections, to give a more balanced overview of Wanda's life and work. Feel free to fill in, PLEASE NOTE: some older material has factual errors, try to source material based on newer research which had access to her archives after 1993. Try to avoid sources which are just rehashes of other rehashes. New sections may be sparse until they are filled in. Dktrfz (talk) 01:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I just noticed that you are including a lot of pages from the same book. Would you consider using just one reference for the book and then using {{Rp}}? In addition, things like "Cech, John (editor), Dictionary of Literary Biographies: American Writers for Children, 1900-1960, Gale Research, 1983, volume 22, pp. 183;" aren't entirely necessary since there already exists a reference that says "Cech, John (editor), Dictionary of Literary Biographies: American Writers for Children, 1900-1960, Gale Research, 1983, volume 22, pp. 179-191;"  Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:19, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea, I'd have to study the procedure in depth before attempting it. There are more sources I'm looking at, but these existing references will be the main ones. I'm trying to eliminate the Cech references, they have been in error in several instances, there are better sources, which have had access to primary materials which had been restricted before 1993. Dktrfz (talk) 18:20, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

2015 update: Still filling in school and work sections. May try to include her various lovers under family and personal life if I get the nerve. Books for Children section still seems awkward, anyone?Dktrfz (talk) 22:52, 21 January 2015 (UTC) How much personal information is too much information? Gág repeatedly wrote of the importance of her lovers (plural) in her work. TMI or relevant? Dktrfz (talk) 17:46, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Honor Awards

Re: Edits by 32.218.47.31. Please check the Caldecott and Newbery sites for a complete description of the differences between Medals and Honors: "Beside the Caldecott Medal, the committee awards a variable number of citations to worthy runners-up, called the Caldecott Honors or Caldecott Honor Books. The "Honor" was introduced in 1971, but some runners-up had been identified annually and all those runners-up were retroactively named Caldecott Honor Books." I am reverting your edits, if you have a reason for your edits, please state it here.Dktrfz (talk) 13:48, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Edits by 32.218.xxx.xx et. al.

Every edit I make is intended to increase accuracy and clarity. Feel free to edit them as much as you like, but refrain from personal attacks.Dktrfz (talk) 01:55, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Archive 1