Talk:Elizabeth, Lady Hope

message: shouldn't we have her quoted reguarding Darwins supposed conversion?
:the 1915 article included in full is supposed to be a quote from her: see link added for her similar (later) letter.- dave souza 19:21, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Quote about Darwin

message: Most of the Elizabeth Hope page is dedicated to the The Lady Hope Story because of it's prominence, but sadly a lot of background on the woman and her character, which is vital to the readers perspective of the story, has been omitted.
I found this statement strange after reading further: "The story remains a popular urban legend".  Dr Paul Marston's article lists four different sources to back up the link between the Elizabeth Hope and the "The Lady Hope Story", so it certainly appears that the story is a disputed fact at worst; to characterise it as an urban ledgend appears to be a strong POV supporting the Darwin's family denial.
I expect the term "urban legend" refers to the suggestion that he "recanted his theory of evolution on his deathbed, and accepted Jesus Christ as a savior", but after reading the "priginal text of the article", it clearly does not state either.
AFAICS "The Lady Hope Story" is the term given to the interpretation of the letter that implies Darwin recanted.  I think the story should be moved onto a separate page so that it does not reflect badly on Lady Hope, who by all accounts appears to have been a good lady and this story was assumed to have been penned by her during her final years.  It would be nice for this page to include more biographical content. Jayvdb 05:04, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am in complete agreement that this page needs more biographical information. However, what she is most famous for is the Darwin story and therefore should stay on this page until the point when (hopefully) we have enough bio data to justify moving it to another page.JoshuaZ 05:40, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Background

message: The 'Initial overview' section sounds rather biased, with talk of retreats etc. Any idea how to change it? 
-- Simon Coleman-Smith, Hants, UK
:First answer is to edit it, as you've done here to make your comment. However the bias has come with recent edits by User:Guillen whose record of POV and poor behaviour is noted at User talk:Guillen, and who added in a lump nicked from CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS  & RESEARCH MINISTRY. To restore it, I clicked on the history tab, then clicked on the date before Guillen's edits, clicked on "edit", copied the text from this old edition, then pasted it into the appropriate section having removed the corrupted version. This leaves untouched lots of additional links G seems to have added: it might be worth reviewing whether these should also be removed. ..dave souza, talk 13:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Biased overview

message: Robertwiddowson has added the following unsourced passage (which gives the appearance of having been copied from another source)
:Nonetheless, there are aspects of her account of the event that are difficult to dispute. Lady Hope provides details that accurately describe the room in which they met, Darwin's appearance, and his behavior. In the Bole Letter (Moore, 86), she recalled that the room was large and had a high ceiling, that Darwin wore a purple dressing gown, and that "his fingers twitched nervously" while they spoke. All these details are correct, though they only suggest she may have met with him. The members of the Darwin family who challenged the truthfulness of the Lady Hope story were not living at home at the time of the alleged visit and when her account was published in 1915 everyone who had been an adult at the time and may have provided key testimony to the contrary was deceased (Moore, 97). In Lady Hope's favor, her character has never been seriously impugned. In 1922, some of her U.S. friends wrote an affidavit, upholding her account of the visit. Moore, who has researched the story most thoroughly, believes the meeting did occur, probably on September 28, 1881, but argues against the content of the conversation as reported by Lady Hope. Sir Robert Anderson, who was head of the Criminal Investigation Department of Scotland Yard, was close friends with Lady Hope and, in reference to the visit, wrote, "...a friend of mine who was much with Darwin during his last illness assures me that he expressed the greatest reverence for the scriptures and bore testimony to their value" (Moore, 48).
:In her account, Lady Hope also stated that Darwin mentioned studying the Letter to the Hebrews. Bowles, following Moore (note 4 to chapter 5--Lady Hope's story, page 131) notes that the only mark in the Darwin family Bible occurs in the margin beside Hebrews, chapter six. Interestingly, this chapter speaks of those who were once close to the gospel but have since fallen away. On its own, the small backward tick proves nothing. However, Darwin did enter university with the intent to become an ordained clergyman in the Church of England but lost his faith in subsequent years. Bowles speculates that Darwin may have made the tick around the time of Lady Hope's alleged visit. Darwin's thoughts, in the final months of his life, may have turned to religion following the death of his older brother, Erasmus (Moore, 56). Until the end, Darwin publicly declared his agnosticism.
The entire passage has an argumentative tone which is unsuitable for an encyclopaedia article.  It's full of conjecture.  In addition, the inclusion of references suggests that it was copied from another source, making it at worst a copyvio and at best plagiarism.  Guettarda 21:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent additions 

message: :Image:Darwin Legend.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Darwin Legend.jpg

message: This article is supposed to be a biography, but most of it is actually about the 'Darwin deathbed confession' story, and its subsequent controversy. That may be what Lady Hope is best known for, but it risks turning this into a coatrack article. Perhaps this section should be spun out into its own article (called Lady Hope story, or whatever), so this article can be kept as a biography. Robofish (talk) 18:45, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The article could use some work, but I don't think it's a coatrack.  How does this article differ (except in quality) from E. B. Grandin?--John Foxe (talk) 01:19, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Essentially, Lady Hope story would have the same content, with the sparse biographical details trimmed slightly, and Elizabeth Hope would be a short stub with a link to the story article. Not a big deal either way, most of the articles linking to this page seem to pipe it as Lady Hope Story and if you want to change it, could you please revise the articles so that they link to the story rather than to the bio stub. Thanks, dave souza, talk 10:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: How about merging the two?  For instance, Ethan Smith redirects to View of the Hebrews where Smith's biography is included. In other words, do we need two articles?--John Foxe (talk) 19:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible coatrack article? 

message: Daniel fabius has attempted to add to the article the following paragraph, which I consider promotional.  If the book itself lacks credibility as a reliable source, it gains nothing by being mentioned in the Examiner of Launceston, Tasmania.--John Foxe (talk) 15:57, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't read the book because it's not available to me in the US. (I've ordered a copy from the UK.) From what I can tell at this point, the book lacks credibility because the author is not a historian and there's no evidence that his material has been peer-reviewed.  In fact, the author's relationship to the obscure publisher is unclear.--John Foxe (talk) 20:39, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  L.R. Croft (2) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Elizabeth Cotton, Lady Hope. 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/20080227014518/http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/darwin/moore-devilschaplain.pdf to http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/darwin/moore-devilschaplain.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:12, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why is the article titled "Elizabeth Cotton, Lady Hope", since she never used that form for her name or was known by it? She was already a public before her first marriage and published her Coffee book under her maiden name, Cotton. After she married her first husband, she stopped using her maiden name. I was wondering if the form used is acceptable under WP:NCP, since she never combined Cotton and Lady Hope for her name. Libertybison (talk) 07:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the current name works under WP:NCBRITPEER even if she never used that style herself.--John Foxe (talk) 21:43, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: , there is a redirect entitled "Lady Hope" that leads directly to the evangelist Lady Hope's page. This is confusing for people searching for the actress and wife of Lord Francis Hope, May Yohé, especially those people who are more aware of her vaguely through the lore of the Hope Diamond and how it was lost from the Hope family through bankruptcy following their divorce. As far as I can tell those are the only two biographical articles which that phrase could be referring to, so a disambiguation page seems to be out of the question. That makes a hatnote necessary, especially on the evangelist's page, if somebody didn't know Yohe's maiden or stage names, or that she divorced Lord Francis and lost her title, and typed in "Lady Hope" in the search box seeking more biographical information on her. (Which was my situation.) Libertybison (talk) 07:07, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the correct way to deal with this is to make the "Lady Hope" page into a disambiguation page, not to put apparently unrelated hatnotes on the two articles. I created the disambiguation page.  Does that solve the problem for you? -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:14, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it does. Thanks. Libertybison (talk) 16:36, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lady Hope Redirect 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Elizabeth Cotton, Lady Hope. 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/20120206154146/http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/01/update_on_kenya.html to http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/01/update_on_kenya.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) 14:23, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified