Talk:Lucy Mercer Rutherfurd

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lucy Mercer Rutherfurd article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Lucy Mercer Rutherfurd. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Lucy Mercer Rutherfurd at the Reference desk.

Lucy Mercer Rutherfurd has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 6, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 31, 2018.

Biography

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 articles

United States: District of Columbia / Presidents Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject District of Columbia (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents (assessed as Mid-importance).

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled Comment[edit]

I have removed the NPOV tag as there was no indication as to the possible problems with the article. If anyone wishes to re-insert the NPOV tag then please comment on this page so that a discussion can take place about how to improve the article. 88.105.128.47 23:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Does not agree with FDR's bio[edit]

This page does not agree with the description of the relationship in FDR's biography.

In what way does it not agree?71.223.160.37 (talk) 23:07, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled Comment[edit]

I believe the last sentence regarding the 2000 tv show "Cheaters" should be deleted. It has nothing to do with the article and is an irrevelant anachronism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.187.41.196 (talk) 22:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- The last section talks about two TV shows, but the word 'Cheaters' is removed. -- AstroU (talk) 12:19, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict?[edit]

"is considered by historians to have been a mistress" vs "the historical record, however, has established the romance beyond doubt." If it has been established beyond a doubt then it she should just be listed as a mistress. What does "considered by historians" even mean? Who else would be an authority on history aside from historians? 71.193.243.8 (talk) 22:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious references[edit]

I have serious doubts about the accuracy of some of the references cited here. The Washington Times-Herald no longer existed in 1966, having been bought by and merged into the Washington Post in 1954. The Times-Herald name stayed on the masthead until 1973, but the paper's name was the Washington Post. There were three major papers in the D.C. area in 1966, the morning Post, and the afternoon Star and Daily News. The Times-Herald references should be verified. Mark Sublette (talk) 08:07, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Mark SubletteMark Sublette (talk) 08:07, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Going for Good Article status[edit]

I'm going to attempt in the coming days to improve this one to Good Article status. Since there's been a cleanup tag on the article for sometime, my guess is that this one isn't being actively watched. But in any case, I plan to take a WP:BRD approach--if you disagree with anything I've done, please revert, and I'll be glad to discuss. Thanks to everybody who's worked on this one to get it to this point. Cheers, Khazar2 (talk) 23:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]