Talk:Elisabeth Murdoch (philanthropist)

message: Good article but Cruden Farm is in Langwarrin which is 5km from Frankston and 13km from Cranbourne. I changed the reference to Cranbourne. --Tatty 03:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cranbourne 

message: I must dispute the claim that the title Lady Murdoch outranks Dame Elisabeth Murdoch.  Neither outranks the other.  It's one thing to make reference to the Lady title in the text of the article, but to give that as her principal name would make Wikipedia a laughing stock.  She is known to the world as Dame Elisabeth, never as Lady Murdoch.  An analogy: Dame Norma Major is entitled to be known as Lady Major by virtue of her husband John Major's knighthood, but her damehood is in her own right so she prefers to be known as that.  If it's good enough for the wife of a former UK PM, it's good enough for an Australian doyenne.  I'm changing it back to Dame Elisabeth Murdoch. JackofOz 12:13, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dame vs. Lady

message: *I have deleted the stuff about her distant ancestors, which may be of interest to antiquarians but is no relevance to her biography.
*I have deleted the sentence rejecting suggestions that her father's family is or was Jewish. Until someone produces a non-crackpot citation for this, it is not a credible assertion and does not need to be denied. (As a matter of fact Green is a fairly common Jewish surname, being a translation of the German Grün, a common Jewish name-element.) Adam 10:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no universal "rule" for determining "national" identity. Each country defines whom it regards as a national according to its own laws or customs, without regard for how other nations define it. Some countries define nationality based upon place of birth, others base it on ancestry, others base it on length or residence. Nor is there any universal definition or law concerning ethnicity, which is a social concept rather than a scientific one, and quite modern compared to the legal concept of "nationality". Indeed, the Jewish rule long pre-dates official definitions of "ethnicity". Nor is that rule "racial", since it ignores the "race" of any and all fathers, and Jews may belong to -- and are readily acknowledged by Jewish authorities as belonging to -- any race . Rather, the rule on Jewish membership is matrilineal -- a very ancient and very common principle for reckoning human kinship and tribal affiliation. Lethiere 22:58, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your considerate answer. The link you pointed me to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrilineality, however, suggests a somewhat more complex situation.--John richard leonard 02:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ancestry

message: I would suggest that the statement ' an upper-class father from England' suggests something like bias.60.229.182.253 (talk) 03:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: Interestingly, this article of a deceased person is semi-protected for the policy of the treatment of LIVING people. That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me. Also, no further explanation is given on this discussion page. --91.52.14.198 (talk) 07:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: No. It was protected because of repeated vandalism comments about Rupert Murdoch. Afterwriting (talk) 07:51, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Living or dead?