Talk:Elizabeth Montgomery
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Elizabeth Montgomery article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: Index, 1 |
 | Biography: Actors and Filmmakers Start‑class | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Biography assessment rating comment
WikiProject Biography Assessment
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 18:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Discussion
- That is an AWESOME picture of Ms. Montgomery! Donmega60645 18:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
- What happened to the picture? We really should have a picture of Ms. Montgomery.
70.23.199.239 04:16, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
- I know on some other articles editors have been removing pictures because of tighter fair-use law. Maybe check back in the history and see who removed it? NickBurns 22:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- The current pic has doesn't even have her in the foreground. Is it just me, or does that seem odd? Mdotley 01:35, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Birthyear
Elizabeth's death certificate at findadeath.com lists her birthyear as 1938. Wikipedia, as well as IMDB list the year as 1933. So, my question : can a legal document contain false information? Which is the correct year?
- Hi, I notice you have posed this question about Mary Wickes and someone else... I don't know. I would have thought that legal documents such as death certificates would be accurate, however I guess they are only as good as the information supplied by the informant, and I guess mistakes can be made. I don't know about the other people but Montgomery's birth year of 1933 is quite well documented. I've seen some photographs of Robert Montgomery's family with the year given as 1939. Judging by the other people in the photographs and their appearance, I would say 1939 is fairly accurate and in these photos Elizabeth Montgomery looks to be 5 or 6 years old, certainly not 1 year old. There seems to be quite a bit of support for the 1933 birth year in various biographies etc, and the only contradictory reference is the death certificate. I feel that the death certificate is wrong in this case. Rossrs 22:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- I have left a message for User:Walloon asking to comment on this as Walloon has expertise in the area of genealogical research. Rossrs 22:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- A death certificate is a legal document as to the facts of the death and burial. It is not the authoritative document in regard to the decedent's date of birth. As a professional genealogist, I can tell you that errors on death certificates about the decedent's date and place of birth, middle name, maiden name, and names of parents, are all too common. The California birth index, 1905-1995, from the California Dept. of Health Services, says that Elizabeth Montgomery was born in Los Angeles County on 15 April 1933. — Walloon 06:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- I thought that might be the case, and I suppose a badly written "1933" could easily be mistaken for "1938". Thank you very much for going that extra mile and checking the California birth index to confirm. Greatly appreciated. Rossrs 08:28, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- I notice that Elizabeth Montgomery was eight years older than her husband, Robert Foxworth. Perhaps she told him she was five years younger than she really was, just to narrow the gap? On the other hand, it would be remarkable if she kept up this deception for the twenty years they were together. — Walloon 08:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- A death certificate is a legal document as to the facts of the death and burial. It is not the authoritative document in regard to the decedent's date of birth. As a professional genealogist, I can tell you that errors on death certificates about the decedent's date and place of birth, middle name, maiden name, and names of parents, are all too common. The California birth index, 1905-1995, from the California Dept. of Health Services, says that Elizabeth Montgomery was born in Los Angeles County on 15 April 1933. — Walloon 06:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- I have left a message for User:Walloon asking to comment on this as Walloon has expertise in the area of genealogical research. Rossrs 22:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, I notice you have posed this question about Mary Wickes and someone else... I don't know. I would have thought that legal documents such as death certificates would be accurate, however I guess they are only as good as the information supplied by the informant, and I guess mistakes can be made. I don't know about the other people but Montgomery's birth year of 1933 is quite well documented. I've seen some photographs of Robert Montgomery's family with the year given as 1939. Judging by the other people in the photographs and their appearance, I would say 1939 is fairly accurate and in these photos Elizabeth Montgomery looks to be 5 or 6 years old, certainly not 1 year old. There seems to be quite a bit of support for the 1933 birth year in various biographies etc, and the only contradictory reference is the death certificate. I feel that the death certificate is wrong in this case. Rossrs 22:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Sleeping Beauty
NO WAY! It's almost impossible to shock me, but WOW! Samantha from Bewitched narrated the audio version of this. I've read De Sade, Burroughs, and The Story of the Eye. I've seen Salo and didn't flinch, but reading this made my jaw drop. HAHA! I love it!
Differences between Answers.com
This entry has been hella modified/sanitized/hacked. Why is the albeit stale echo of this Wiki entry at http://www.answers.com/topic/elizabeth-montgomery so different? This new version here has left out some less savory aspects of her life (affair with Richard Michael?). BAD FORM--whoever did this. 88.242.191.37 22:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Was the statement about Richard Michael sourced/verified? If it was just speculation, perhaps that's why it was removed. NickBurns 22:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Point well taken: I don't know about the veracity of the source regarding the affair. That aside, what about the radical--and overall without discussion--editing of the entire (and I mean entire) page (looking at the answers.com mirror, that page is now gone, well--so much for my proof). 88.242.249.240 20:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well there are no sources at all there now. As for your "proof", nothing is lost on Wikipedia-- check the history tab on the article's page. Me, I'm marking the whole article as needing citations. -- Yamara 18:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- Point well taken: I don't know about the veracity of the source regarding the affair. That aside, what about the radical--and overall without discussion--editing of the entire (and I mean entire) page (looking at the answers.com mirror, that page is now gone, well--so much for my proof). 88.242.249.240 20:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Hollywood Walk of Fame
According to this article, Montgomery won't get her star until 2009 -- but I've never heard of it taking that long from announcement to star dedication; usually it's no more than a year. However there's an EM fan site (I can't find the link at the moment) that says the star was dedicated earlier this year. And this site says she got it back in 2004. So which is correct? At the very least the 2009 date given here needs to be verified and sourced because it just doesn't sound right. PS. I am not connected to the anonymous editor in the above thread (our IPs look similar at first glance) 68.146.8.46 00:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Article under attack from HarveyCarter IPs SP
- 92.13.83.61 (talk · contribs) - 16 & 18 June 2008
- 92.13.140.116 (talk · contribs) - 20 June 2008
Revert all sock puppet additions in this 92.8.x.x to 92.12.x.x IP range.