Talk:Estée Lauder (businesswoman)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Women's History (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


Birthdate[edit]

Lauder's birthdate is in question. She was apparently born on July 1 of some year. [1] The year was probably either 1906 or 1908 because the news stories of her death say either "She was believed to be 95" (AP report) (CTV), or "she was 97" (Independent), or "her family said she was 97" (NYT). I'm going with 97. If that and my math is right, she was born in 1906. -- Ke4roh 03:02, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Disambiguation[edit]

Why was the company moved off this page? When most people think of Estee Lauder, I don't think they are thinking of the person. There's so little about the person herself that I think this easily fits into the article about her company. Ambivalenthysteria 07:44, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I tend to agree, though I had a bit of a quandry last night. I think with her death, we have an opportunity to create an article on her. (Then again, the question that arises is: "Was her life significantly separate from her company?") My first thought was to make a new article called "Estée Lauder (person)", but that seemed wrong. I looked into the name of the company [2], and decided using "Estée Lauder Inc." was preferable to an "Estée Lauder (person)" page.
As to the opportunity at hand, I have requested permission for a couple of photographs, and I wonder if someone will take an interest this week to flush out the text of the article. If not, perhaps the (person) page is the way to go. -- Ke4roh 11:53, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I think it's a hard call. With her death, I agree that there's the tempation to write a seperate article on the person. But the two are quite intertwined, and I think that will negatively affect an article on the company. If a page for the person is to remain, I think it should go at (person), however. Ambivalenthysteria 11:57, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable... so I got halfway through the process and hit a roadblock. I moved the person page to (person) and tried to move the company page from Inc. back to Estée Lauder, to no avail. It says I need sysop access to do that. A puzzle for this evening (unless you beat me to it). -- Ke4roh 17:10, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Put in a redirect to the Inc. page for now. -- Ke4roh 23:19, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I agree that, long-term, the redir should definately be to the co. However, since she just died, I'd be inclined to leave it at her article for the next, say, month (at least two weeks). Niteowlneils 06:23, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I think that's fair enough. Ambivalenthysteria 06:37, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)