This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Eleanor Roosevelt article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Eleanor Roosevelt was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion. Explanation for inclusion in WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies: Display of this Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies project tag does not necessarily reflect Eleanor Roosevelt's sexual orientation but only that she falls within the scope of the project as she is a gay icon.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt did NOT get married at "Algonac" in Newburgh, New York, but instead at the double-townhouse home of Eleanor's great aunt and cousin, Margaret Ludlow and Susan Ludlow Parish. This house is located at 6-8 East 76th Street in New York City [Manhattan]. Please correct this.
Also, the article lists Eleanor's maternal grandmother as Mary Livington Ludlow. But the surname "Hall" should be added to this as well, since "Hall" was her married surname. "Ludlow" is her maiden name. 73.47.78.64 (talk) 04:04, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for spotting that! I found a citation for the place of marriage and have made that and your recommended name change. Very much appreciated! --TeaDrinker (talk) 04:22, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Service as "United States Delegate to the United Nations General Assembly"
The third line of the article says that Roosevelt served as "United States Delegate to the United Nations General Assembly from 1945 to 1952" and gives a link to the page for the "List of ambassadors of the United States to the United Nations." This implies that Roosevelt was the US ambassador from 1945 to 1952 but, according to the second page, the ambassadors during this time were Edward Stettinius Jr., Herschel Johnson, and Warren Austin. Instead, Roosevelt was the "1st United States Representative to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights," as the side bar indicates. I feel like this link/text is misleading, and it should instead say that "Roosevelt served as United States Delegate to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights from 1945 to 1952," as, based on the information I have, this appears more accurate. I may be wrong, however, and I welcome any explanation on the historical context that would explain the wording used here.(talk) 04:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC) OmegaGamma (talk) 04:02, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Delist for insufficient referencing, and many citations this does use are improperly formatted (e.g. some incorrect uses of italics). There also are lots of super short paragraphs that make the flow of text feel choppy (I'm particularly concerned about the ones with only one sentence). SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
ER deserves her tenure as First Lady to be its own article.
She redefined the role and is widely viewed as the greatest First Lady of all time by a wide margin. Her role as First Lady deserves its own article. Vinnylospo (talk) 03:27, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Splitting her tenure as First Lady from the rest of her life-text would damage this article. At present there are no separate pages for first ladies outside of their biographical page, although many were as prominent and influential in American history (Abigail Adams, Dolley Madison, Edith Wilson, Jacqueline Kennedy, etc.). Randy Kryn (talk) 11:55, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, which is why I feel Roosevelt also deserves an additional article. Especially as she was the First Lady longer than anyone else. Vinnylospo (talk) 03:41, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No split although it makes sense if you have an article in mind because of the existence of the Clinton page, but the same as hers it should not be a split and nothing should be removed from this page. Roosevelt's legacy is as First Lady and then her time at the United Nations formation, so removing anything about her role as First Lady from this page, where it is covered extensively and is a central feature of the page, would be harmful to the article and would lose readers who do not click from page to page. I don't see why a duplicate page is needed, the information is already right here. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:11, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, a separate article is called for -- there is a large scholarly and popular literature on her role as First Lady--she indeed invented the modern activist dimension of that role. Google Scholar hists 17,000 scholarly books and articles with search words "Eleanor" and "First Lady" see list hereRjensen (talk) 15:58, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
True, as long as it's not a "split". Nothing should be removed from this article, Roosevelt's principal page. Her years in the White House were too central to her biography to "split", although a split doesn't seem to be what Vinnylospo is suggesting but, like yourself, an expanded stand-alone page. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:04, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then I'm in support as well, as long as this principal page isn't lessened. It could be a very good page and give Roosevelt her due in an encyclopedic context. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:55, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Vinnylospo, am ambitious project! There's a lot to copy/paste from this article, so the foundation for much of a Roosevelt First Lady page can be built and expanded around it (I think using a great deal from another article is okay as long as attribution is made in the edit summaries or talk page). Have "High Hopes" for the page. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A start-up idea, why don't you copy the existing sections into a draft page and then those who want to can work on it have a place to edit. Rjensen seems enthused, and if you can get his help you are half-way home. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:47, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NO SPLIT. The article on Eleanor Roosevelt handles her years as First Lady well. She cannot be compared with Hillary Clinton, since (at least) she held no official elected position. "First Lady" is not an office. I have no objection to a separate article on her dozen years as First Lady, but keep in mind that this is an encyclopedia article. It is not expected to be comprehensive. Many others have already handled the material in books and memoirs, and on-line. What is missing from the present article??? One must distinguish between matters of importance and trivia. Vicedomino (talk) 09:21, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose split. I'd welcome more information as appropriate, and a proposed draft would be fine to review, but we should be cautious about trimming too much content from this main page during a split, but also about a subpage being duplicative of this or excessively detailed. WP:SUMMARYSTYLE and ensuring appropriate weight among sections can be difficult. A subarticle should only be considered in the context of how the pages would be structured, not whether the topic is "deserving" – I think the content deserves to be in this high-readership main page! Reywas92Talk02:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Favor split. She invented the modern First Lady role and meanwhile had a very full life with other roles that were separate from her wifely role (eg as widow after 1945). She ranks with Hillary in terms of post-First Lady importance. (and I think was much more important in the First Lady role than Hillary was.) Rjensen (talk) 03:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seem to be three issues here: 1) can there be another article, yes, if, as I presume there are, studies of her role as first lady exist; 2) can this article be trimmed, that depends on what you are proposing to trim; 3) can the hypothetical new article be made to mesh with this article, yes, it should but it can't do that based on a hypothetical. Alanscottwalker (talk) 13:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No trimming is needed. A new article would be fine as long as nothing is lost or removed from Roosevelt's primary article. Splitting is an altogether different method of presenting information, and done poorly (which it often is) hurts, not helps, the encyclopedia and its content. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.jpg){kind=small}
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. This is already covered in the article. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:49, 13 March 2023 (UTC)