# Talk:Jane Pierce

What's up with Jane's right hand? It appears either gloved or some how blackened. Frost bite?
Why is this Jane Pierce artical linked to Jamestown?  It cannot possibly be the same person as the third wife of John Rolf! The dates are completely wrong not to  mention the history.

A single reference I have states that Mrs. Pierce was known by Washington as the "Shadow of the White House". Anyone have other references for this?

I have a source that claims she spent two years of her life in the upstairs of the White House writing "maudlin"letters to her dead son? Can anyone else confirm this?

This article refers to her as an invalid at the end of her life, but doesn't say what the cause was.  Just depression?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.149.78.122 (talk) 04:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)    Mrs Pierce almost certainly had tuberculosis, along with the varied and somewhat amorphous somatic afflictions of what was called at the time neurasthenia. Plutonium27 (talk) 03:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

The article was assessed C-class for lack of in-line citations. Boneyard90 (talk) 14:52, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jane Pierce. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040102084847/http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/firstladies/jp14.html to http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/firstladies/jp14.html
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: 5 June 2024).

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) 07:41, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

When I stumbled upon this article, it included only two footnotes--one referring to a YouTube video and another to a dubious-looking website. (There were some other references listed, but there were no inline citations to them.) It had been tagged for insufficient sources since 2017. Some material had been directly lifted from another website. There was a glaring historical error. What a mess. 
I have cleaned this up a bit and solved some of the obvious problems, but a lot more inline citations are needed and the article just needs more work overall. I have bumped it down to Start-class. 24.29.56.240 (talk) 13:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Jane's family was opposed to the union due to Pierce's political ambitions.

Was he batting for the wrong side, or did they just not like politicians? Valetude (talk) 01:04, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

This generally looks like a solid piece of work. The sources look generally good, but I'm not sure about the sourcebooks publication. There are a few places where the prose gets confusing, redundant, or colloquial: for instance, the "The two were together for seven years"; there were together far longer, presumably this refers to the period before marriage. "supported the preservation of slavery in order to preserve the nation and the Constitution" reads as somewhat POV. I've made a few minor copy-edits to address some of these, but in other places access to the sources is needed to make the fixes. The biggest issue to me is the lead; it's very confusingly ordered, and contains redundancy. It also mentions Varina Davis performing First Lady duties, which is not something covered in the body. I would recommend rewriting the lead completely prior to GAN, but otherwise, I see no reason not to nominate this after some prose fixes. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:30, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Agree with Vanamonde. Looks good.

The images all seem to be missing their "alt" descriptions.
In "Marriage and family," maybe mention the effect on Jane of the deaths of her two other children, building to Benjamin's tragic death. (Could also be in the lead if it was significant.)
It would be nice reword the ending. Her opinion of Crockett sort of walks off a cliff at the end.
I made minor copyedits. Best wishes for your GAN. -4 October 2022 edited SusanLesch (talk) 14:43, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jane Pierce/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Unexpectedlydian (talk · contribs) 12:03, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello! I'll be reviewing this article as part of the Women in Green October Editathon. I'll add comments in the table below shortly. Unexpectedlydian♯4talk‽ 12:03, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi again @Thebiguglyalien, this is a very good article and my comments are only pretty minor. The one comment I'm personally struggling with is the copyright status of the Jane Pierce coin (I've explained in criteria 6a); I saw you uploaded the image so I'm hoping you'll be able to help me with that. I'm putting the article on hold, do let me know if you have any questions. Unexpectedlydian♯4talk‽ 14:55, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the bibliography, it's the only book where sources are drawn from disparate parts of the text. All other book sources only use information from a single page or a single chapter, rendering sfn unnecessary. Regarding the image of the coin, my understanding is that trademark is distinct from copyright in a way that allows its use. The trademark prevents you or I from starting our own line of coins called "United States Mint Uncirculated Coin Set", but (to my understanding) has no effect on the copyright of the image. Regarding all other concerns, I've edited the article to address them. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:00, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
@Thebiguglyalien Thank you for addressing these changes so swiftly and for your explanations. I've crossed off where the changes have been addressed. Happy to promote this to GA now, thanks for your work on this article :) Unexpectedlydian♯4talk‽ 13:13, 9 October 2022 (UTC)