Talk:Laura Secord

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Canada Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Ontario
Ontario Portal
This article is part of the Ontario WikiProject (Discuss/Join).

Contents

[edit] Reversion: Laura Secord in Fiction

I'm not opposed to inclusion of a "Laura Secord in Fiction" section as such, but the Harry Turtledove reference is, at best, extremely tangential, in that the character in the novel in question happens to have the name Laura Secord and is described as a distant descendent of the original. Interesting perhaps to fans of Harry Turtledove, but so far as encyclopedia entries go... Geoff NoNick 18:36, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, that's true, sorry. I just get an itchy rollback finger when people remove large chunks of text without an edit summary :) Adam Bishop 03:03, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] chocolates ("legacy")

This appears to be blatant advertising, and I propose to remove it if no-one objects. Palmiro 17:25, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I'd just as soon leave it in. Laura Secord Chocolates are something of an institution and it's not unreasonable that someone might look it up trying to find out more. Geoff NoNick 17:32, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
Fair enough, if you're convinced. Palmiro 17:35, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
I disagree strongly, Laura Secord is not, and never has been an "institution". There's no historical relevance. Do all Wikipedia articles include references to corporations that use a name. Think about it... there is precidence to be considered.
Most Canadians, when they hear the name Laura Secord, think chocolate. Avoiding commercialism is one thing, denying that commercial institutions exist is another. --22:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I was going to wiki-link "Laura Secord Chocolates" in this reference, but noticed that that page redirects here. While it's fine making a brief mention of a company named after her, it doesn't make sense for that company to redirect here, since it really doesn't have anything to do with her. --Q Canuck 00:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Website

I really Like this website.It has good information and is exactly what i needed for my mid-term project on Laura Secord. Thanks to all who helped make this biography.

                                        With Great Appreciation,
                                                          Niru

[edit] UE?

Whether or not descendents of Loyalists refer to themselves as UE, I don't know, but what possible justification can there be for referring to Secord that way? She herself would obviously not have used UE, and I have never seen anyone else use with her name either. It sounds not only dubious but also ridiculous. Adam Bishop, BA, MA, VC, GCVO, SGM, QHDS 15:50, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, the use of post-nominals in general is (as you illustrated) silly, but UE is a recognized one that was prevalent at the time of her life. Whether or not she used it (and she probably didn't), she can be regarding in many ways as the archetypal UE. Given her place in Canadian history and the otherwise lack of official recognition she received in her lifetime (100 pounds notwithstanding), some sort of title seems appropriate. But I admit I haven't seen UE used with respect to Laura Secord in the past - can anyone offer other views? Geoff NoNick 19:05, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

User:Arctic.gnome, can you explain why UE is necessary here? In what way is this a title or an official post-nominal? Are there any sources that ever use "Laura Secord, UE"? Who granted this title to her? When did she use it herself? When has anyone, anywhere, ever referred to his this way? Adam Bishop 06:52, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

U.E. is Canada's one official hereditary title, it was created as a post-nominal by Lord Dorchester's Order-in-Council in 1789. Laura's father qualified for it, and the honour is hereditary by children of either sex. Of course we would not attach the letters to every single Loyalist descendent on the Wikipedia; however, she is famous because of her loyalty to a British Canada, and is possibly the most famous UE after politicians and generals. I think that makes it worth adding her royally given title to her article.
Great, but has anyone ever used this title in association with Laura, outside of Wikipedia? Did she use it? Adam Bishop 16:40, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
I know that genealogists do, at least. It’s the kind of thing that you only include when giving someone’s full, formal name, which rarely happens with anyone. People don’t use her middle name when referring to her either, but we’ve included that. The title legally applies to her, and is very relevant to who she is in history. The Wikipedia convention is to include all titles on the first line, even if not commonly used in practice.
Well, Ingersoll isn't her middle name, and we shouldn't include that either. Where do genealogists use this, anyway? Adam Bishop 07:58, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that the article describes her family as not being loyalists, but when you klick on the link to her father and then onto the town of Ingersoll the story changes to him bing a loyalist. Are they loyalists? Ozdaren 14:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Song title

I believe the song title is simply, "Secord's Warning." I don't see where the "for Love" part would come in. It has nothing to do with the song to the best of my knowledge.

[edit] Intro Paragraph

In the intro section it asserts that "Suffering the aftermath of the American Revolution, her father, Thomas Ingersoll, moved the family to Canada in 1795...", without going into any details as to the alleged suffering. Ingersoll's own wiki page, however would lead one to believe that the move was instigated by the avilibility of cheap land in Canada. Unless anyone has a good reason not to, I would edit the intro section to conform to Ingersoll's page, as the existing version is vague and contradictory. PreciousRoi (talk) 09:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)