Talk:Joan Hammond

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

Damehood[edit]

This occurred in 1974, when the Whitlam government was in power federally, and in accordance with Labor Party policy they never recommended any knighthoods or damehoods. Was it a non-Labor state government that made the recommendation, or possibly the UK government? Any ideas? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 01:28, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand and Australia[edit]

She is both, as she was born in New Zealand and was probably naturalised as an Australian. Wallie (talk) 10:04, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, you are wrong. Dame Joan is an Aussie, plain and simple. In this instance country of birth is not relevant to notability and should not be included in opening sentence, MOS:BIO. Thanks, and please do not edit again without further discussion, you only make yourself look foolish. Ernest the Sheep (talk) 01:19, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Ernest the Sheep and I think that the repeated reversals by XLerate were not well considered. Hammond, according to her own words, "was conceived in England, born in New Zealand, and raised in Australia." This is properly reflected in the body of her article; that she was born in New Zealand, 6 months before she and her mother followed her father, who had left for Sydney even earlier, does not belong in the lead (or be the basis for any categorisation, which thankfully it currently is not). -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:21, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't agree with Ernest. Dame Joan ws born in New Zealand. You can't get away from that point. It is a question of patriotism. Dame Joan is a Kiwi. She is probably also an Australian. Wallie (talk) 02:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Wallie. I see you've been here a while, so you should know that we don't do things out of patriotism on Wikipedia. That's about as clear a WP:NPOV violating stance as can be taken.
This is about mentioning New Zealand in the lede. From what I'm seeing, this detail of her birth is not significant to her notability and this means we don't mention it right up front. Please don't see this as a slight to New Zealand. I don't see anyone 'against' the country or the people; it's beautiful and they're quite nice from my experiences. I like Oz and 'stralians, too. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 03:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, MOS:BIO is clear enough on this; mention of New Zealand is in the lede is only appropriate if is is somehow relevant to her notability, which seems to not be the case here. Those seeking to include this in the lede need to establish why it is appropriate. Cheers, Jack Merridew 16:54, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wallie, re this supposed "naturalisation" as an Australian: Joan Hammond was born in New Zealand in May 1912 and moved to Australia in around November 1912. At that time, both New Zealand and Australia were populated by British subjects. There were exactly zero New Zealand citizens, because New Zealand citizenship did not exist till 1 January 1949. And there were exactly zero Australian citizens, because Australian citizenship did not exist till 26 January 1949. The first time anyone was ever naturalised an Australian citizen was some time after 25 January 1949. British subjects resident in Australia on 26 January 1949, such as Joan Hammond, automatically became Australian citizens on that day, without any need for "naturalisation". So, she went from being a British subject to an Australian citizen. She was never at any time in her life a New Zealand citizen. She was born there and spent the first 6 months of her life there, that's all. It's worthy of mention as part of her overall story, but does it in any way contribute to what she was notable for? Answer: No, in no way. Therefore, it does not belong in the lede paragraph. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 05:12, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, she would have become a New Zealand citizen by operation of NZ law on 1 January 1949, having been born there. She became an Australian citizen by operation of Australian law on 26 January 1949, and would have remained a New Zealand citizen because there was nothing in the law of either country to gainsay that. (So, she was a dual Australian–New Zealand citizen.) However, I agree that the fact that she was born in New Zealand or was a New Zealand citizen doesn't belong in the opening section. Ondewelle (talk) 22:36, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sexuality[edit]

Her lesbianism was something she never hid. Her "loving companion Lolita Marriott" is mentioned proudly on her gravestone. Are we being coy about this for any particular reason? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:12, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speculation about Hammond's sexuality is the opening hook in Hardy's book, but Hammond in her autobiography never went further than calling Marriott "my good friend". Following an interview with Hammond's niece, Julie Weyer, Hardy leaves the matter at "They probably didn't explore the physical side of it—but who knows?—and who cares! It doesn't matter: they loved each other." Whether Hammond had a part in the words on her gravestone is a matter of speculation; it seems more likely that its wording was determined by Marriott.
I doubt that the wording was determined by Marriott, since she died before Hammond. I doubt it was determined by Hammond either, since she was unwell and somewhat mentally obtunded before she died and not, I think, in a state to be worrying about what was said on her grave. In any case, I think it doesn't really matter who decided the wording. Ondewelle (talk) 14:22, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I care about a subject's sexuality as much as I care about the colour of their eyes, so I didn't add it when I recently cleared the {{Citation needed}} tags. If others feel differently: this is Wikipedia. I would only caution against an overly zealous application of LGBT-related categories & banners, because they don't seem to be particularly defining for her. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:10, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, not defining at all. But if George Clooney happened to be gay, we'd have no qualms in mentioning that, even though it has nothing to do with his acting career. And if Hammond happened to be a chess addict, we'd have no qualms in mentioning that, even though it had nothing to do with her singing career. So, ...... Anyway, it's still in the realm of speculation for Hammond, as it turns out. I thought it was more established than that; or maybe it's what's called in the trade "an open secret". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:36, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect that the modern fashion of defining people by their sexuality (or even their supposed sexuality) hadn't taken hold in the middle years of the last century... Ondewelle (talk) 14:24, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Joan Hammond. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 02:50, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Joan_Hammond&oldid=1212107577"