Jump to content

Talk:Margaret Mitchell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cleanup

[edit]

12/19/2010-- Search for Peggy Marsh and you get this article... I dunno how to fix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.80.147.142 (talk) 05:19, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article has been in Wikipedia:Cleanup since September 2005. It still has significant issues including a near complete lack of sourcing. Surely there are some Mitchel and Gone with the Wind fans willing to touch this page up? --Lendorien 17:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of the information comes from the actual tour guides at the Margaret Mitchell House. I know I had contributed a lot of the information based on what they had said. How do you cite tour guides? Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 07:12, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page says that Gone with the Wind is "the most translated and best-selling novel in history" and the goes on to cites a source that contradicts this statement. According to Wikipedia's "list of best-selling books" it comes in at #43.

I am reiterating the previous statement. It is impossible for "Gone with the Wind" to be cited as "the second best-selling book, next to the Bible, in history" given that the rest of the article on Margaret Mitchell, as well as the article on "Gone with the Wind" both say that it is merely a "best-selling book", one which has sold around 30 million copies. The sales estimate falls behind innumerable other books which are referenced in the article on "best-selling books" and is a claim that can be easily challenged with any simple web search. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.30.217 (talk) 05:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:LostLaysen.jpg

[edit]

Image:LostLaysen.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Challenging reliable sources used for the section “Historic basis”

[edit]

The main source used for this section is from a self-published book. Other sources include newspaper interviews and a book review on Amazon dot com Jim (talk) 03:11, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy and lead

[edit]

Sixteen hours ago this was the entire Legacy section (no reference).

Legacy
Mitchell's work Gone with the Wind has become one of the best selling books of all time. For this reason, she is one of the celebrated American authors of the 20th century.

That is so general, and so important if true, it does belong in the lead. It is so general and short, it does not alone support a Legacy section in the article.

So I combined it with the lead at the same time I added the National Book Award, 1936 Novel, with ref contemporary NYTimes coverage. (Compare. The {infobox} and Novelist tweaks are not substantial.) The reference is specific to the National Book Award; not Pulitzer Prize, only lifetime novel, or the former Legacy.

Today both halves of the former Legacy have been deleted from the lead, and thus from the article, because they were not supported (all-time best-selling book; celebrated 20c American author). The claims are supported by references at List of best-selling books and Gone With the Wind.

This hour I will add the National Book Award to the latter article and slightly improve its reference to all-time best-seller status, so that both Legacy claims will be supported in the article on the book. --P64 (talk) 16:42, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Gone With the Wind. --P64 (talk) 20:44, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

foilage?

[edit]

One quote reads "glimpsed through the dark green of cedar foilage". Did it really originally say "foilage" (a mis spelling Merriam-Webster rather generously calls "nonstandard"? If so, it should be protected with a {{Not a typo}} to prevent someone from "fixing" it. If it isn't in the original quote, it should be fixed. 87.114.90.137 (talk) 02:30, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was a typo. Thanks for catching it.Prairiegrl (talk) 15:49, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Risky Philanthropy Revealed in PBS's American Masters Documentary

[edit]

PBS recently broadcast an American Masters series documentary on Margaret Mitchell ("Margaret Mitchell: American Rebel.")

A substantial part of the documentary dealt with Mitchell's philanthropy from the revenues she received from Gone with the Wind.

Much of this philanthropy was directed to Morehouse College and other black institutions in Atlanta. The philanthropy had to be kept secret, and correspondence was handled by private messenger. It had to be kept secret because racial feelings at the time would have endangered Mitchell and her family.

I was disappointed that none of this aspect of Mitchell's life is covered in the Wikipedia article on Mitchell. 

Joe Gerard (talk) 10:17, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Margaret Mitchell the writer, the author, the journalist. Her philanthropy is mostly irrelevant to writing. If you look at the biography pages of other important writers, such as Ernest Hemmingway or Harper Lee, they make no mention of philanthropy. It's probably a topic more relevant to the Morehouse College article, but the Morehouse College page makes no mention of it. Had it been discussed there, we could link to it from this page. The two USS Atlanta pages mention Mitchell as the sponsor, and we have a link to both those pages.Prairiegrl (talk) 23:33, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Typos

[edit]

Surely, the year of death is 1939, not 1949? I've changed 'While the Great War waged in Europe (1914–1918) ...' to 'raged'. Norvo (talk) 23:02, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1949 is correct and waged is also the correct usage in the sentence. Check a dictionary.Prairiegrl (talk) 23:20, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are right on the year of death. Sorry I queried that. As for the verb, to wage is transitive, that is, it can only be used with an object. So, grammatically, wars do not 'wage'; someone or a country wages a war or campaign. Look it up, with attention to detail (including little abbreviations like tr. and T), in a dictionary that gives examples of usage. Norvo (talk) 03:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, correct, I saw that. But it is also used to mean continued or carried on. Think of it as, While the Great War continued in Europe. Also, it could be changed to while the Great War was being waged in Europe. intransitive verb: to be in the process of occurring... example: The riot waged for several hours.Prairiegrl (talk) 13:03, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't figure out how to do this, but in the section titled "Girlhood on Jackson Hill," in Paragraph 6, surely you mean "thrashing" (a beating) rather than "threshing" (what you do to separate wheat from chaff after harvesting). JRanelle (talk) 11:45, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GWTW

[edit]

The section titled 'Writing Gone with the Wind' doesn't even start to describe the evolution of the novel, how far it relates to MM's family history, and the role of the publisher in generating the finished work. This is an extraordinarily brief and insubstantial section, for what should be the main part of the article. 86.144.64.85 (talk) 23:21, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Valuable resource

[edit]

This wiki article is dreadfully remiss and misleading so I thought I'd recommend the one-hour PBS documentary biography Margaret Mitchell: American Rebel, which is viewable free online for anyone living in the U.S.: [1]. It's an excellent source and can be used and cited. It expires April 1, 2016. Softlavender (talk) 11:45, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seems biased

[edit]

This article doesn't really seem to comply with NPOV. It has a fairly strong anti-South bias (referring to "the South of her imagination" and is derogatory toward the Confederate veterans). I don't really want to do it because I'm from the south and somebody would accuse ME of bias. Maybe an editor from another country can clean it up. White Arabian Filly (Neigh) 01:19, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Margaret Mitchell. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 05:57, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Margaret Mitchell. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 00:06, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Margaret_Mitchell&oldid=1193934480"