Talk:Jane Pierce

message: 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)
thread_title: Invalid?

message: The article was assessed C-class for lack of in-line citations. Boneyard90 (talk) 14:52, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP: Women's History Assessment Commentary 

message: 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.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:41, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 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)
thread_title: Mess

message: 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)
thread_title:  What's wrong with political ambition? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  WiG brief review 

message: 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)
thread_title: Feedback