Talk:Rosa Bonheur

message: I added a new picture, could someone format the page? Thanks!-Hairchrm 03:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting 

message: This article was automatically  assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 08:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: Over time I will attempt to fix this article, but it must be said that at present it is a total mess. There are so many egregious errors of fact here that it boggles the mind. Paintings are/were miss-named, said to be in the wrong locations, genders of persons described were switched, politicians and religious figures became painting instructors, occurrences are out of order. It is probably the worst article I have stumbled upon on the Wiki. Yikes! Saudade7 18:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: This article is a mess

message: More of her pictures would be good. Like , Hafspajen (talk) 16:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presentation of an artist 

message: This edit by AyeolaWhitworth2 was reverted because of improper citation formatting, not because sources were unreliable (as stated here). With correct formatting and further verification such an edit may be more appropriate. Coldcreation (talk) 07:06, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Similar stuff (but better referenced) was largely removed a year ago, which may have been a mistake. Global "trousers" please, not Yankee Imperialist "pants"!  And that para was far too long etc. Johnbod (talk) 15:54, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Now we have this, by AyeolaWhitworth3], which I've had to tidy, as it was all bold. Johnbod (talk) 01:19, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  On gender issues 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Anna Klumpke - Portrait of Rosa Bonheur (1898).jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on . You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-11-08. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 17:05, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image from this article to appear as POTD soon 

message: Voice concern 2402:8100:2563:41E7:90E6:D053:CB53:EB5 (talk) 01:20, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roja behna 

message: Please fix the statement in “Personal life and legacy” that says, ‘Until 2013 women in France were forbidden from wearing trousers…’ 2600:1000:B10A:AEA6:A054:79FD:8B07:55C (talk) 11:10, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Adjusted - amazingly the date is correct, but the law was ignored by then. Johnbod (talk) 17:57, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect date 

message: Please help me with...
Rosa Bonheur Hello! The third paragraph of the "Personal life and legacy" section of this article is offensive and insipid. "Her romantic life was that of a lesbian. However, there is no confirmation that her relationships with women were sexual." How would we even have evidence of that? Unless there's a personal journal with her thoughts on sex, we have no reason to even comment on it. Clicking on the source also neither confirms nor denies her sexual life. The idea that queer people must have rumors on their sexual habits included on their own page is so so stupid and useless. This paragraph also includes " At a time when lesbian sex – particularly tribadism – was regarded as animalistic and deranged by most French officials, Bonheur's outspokenness about her personal life was groundbreaking." At no point is tribadism brought up in the citation. This is a salacious and voyeuristic implication for no reason. If the citation cited a French newspaper that condemned her openness with her favorite sexual positions, then fine. But it doesn't. I've never edited a Wikipedia article before so I'm not sure about removing or editing these two lines that add nothing of substance to the article, especially of someone that is in the spotlight today. 136.176.177.106 (talk) 15:22, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: See the section above, and many more before that. Johnbod (talk) 16:24, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help me! 

message: There has been much discussion on this talk page regarding whether the information on her sexuality is superfluous, but it seems to me that the focus on  her sexuality is at the right amount, but more information is required for other sections of the article. Her lesbianism shouldn't be stated as fact, because this is a WP:BIOGRAPHY page, and she never (As I have seen) referred to herself as such. Cassie Schebel, almost a savant. <3 (talk) 20:21, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion 

message: Who is in favor of removing "Although she was a lesbian, there is no confirmation that her relationships with women were sexual"?That statement seems illogical and contradictory. In no way would she have been able to directly claim the sexual nature of her relationships due to the period she lived in. I read the 1981 article that was cited and it seems outdated and borderline homophobic. Clarence Patch (talk) 19:34, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Her supposed lesbianism is not grounded at all. It may or may not correspond to what happened, but nothing support this claim, except the preconceptions of those who wrote about it. It is a recent reinvention about her life to adapt to our current views. As for a lot of things about her life, including feminism. She lived with women for a large part of her life, but it completely mirrors the beliefs of her father who was a Saint-Simonian. For example she did not live only with Micas, but also Micas mother. The Micas family handled the day to day management of the manor.Hervegirod (talk) 12:13, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source 29 

message: There are a lot of completely false claims about the so-called Rosa "lesbianism". She might have been lesbian, or not, but no fact support this claim. And the claim that "she was open about her lesbianism" is absolutely not grounded. Hervegirod (talk) 12:09, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lesbianim