Talk:Hazel Carter (writer)

Removed category

I took out Category:Female wartime crossdressers because the description of the cat says:

for women who have cross-dressed as men for the purpose of serving in the military

From the article, it seems her cross-dressing had more to do with going to see her husband. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 06:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

A lot of female wartime crossdressers entered battle because they didn't want to leave their husbands. Besides, she fell in as a private and recieved a military funeral. I'm going to put her back in the category. Asarelah (talk) 04:37, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hazel Carter. 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/20071031082042/http://teachpol.tcnj.edu/amer_pol_hist/thumbnail300.html to http://teachpol.tcnj.edu/amer_pol_hist/thumbnail300.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:52, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Is the image a hoax?

The image that is used in the infobox is categorized as a hoax on Wikimedia Commons. Compare the list of categories at the file page. Renerpho (talk) 06:33, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Renerpho,

The image is not a hoax. I likely used the word hoax because the reason she is notable involved an act intended to trick people. The image is legitimate. I uploaded the file as File:HazelCarter.jpe on 24 February 2004. This was very early on, prior to the modern Wikimedia documenting system, prior even to any standardized documenting system at all. It was later transferred to Wikimedia during the overhaul.

I took the from a .edu site now archived as this, which credited the image to the National Archives and Records Administration. That site was curated by a professor in history (I was going to reach out to him, but it looks like he retired in 2009). I just went to look on the National Archives and found the image here. It is a bit frustrating because that URL neglects a description, but here you can see that there was a full description.

I hope this answers your question and gives you enough to work on.

Sincerely,

Kingturtle = (talk) 10:12, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Kingturtle! I suppose the meaning of the category is ambiguous -- used for images that are actually hoaxes but are kept for INUSE and NPOV reasons, and images about hoaxes. Following the discussion about File:Flag_of_bechuanaland_protectorate.png, a bona fide hoax that has just been deleted, I looked through the category and noticed the Hazel Carter image, which was not obviously connected to a hoax, but which had no source or author information on the file page. I did not consider the "tricking people" as constituting a hoax, so to me it looked unrelated to the content of the article. Renerpho (talk) 18:37, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Image restored to the article, file description changed, ambiguous category removed. Renerpho (talk) 23:59, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Wrong birthplace

The article says that Carter was born in the Huachuca mountains near Douglas, Arizona. This is based on a single sentence in a contemporary article [1] from a local newspaper -- not the most reliable source for biographical information! Should that source be considered authoritative, considering that all official records disagree? Aren't there any more recent secondary sources about her early life, so that we don't have to rely on 100-year-old dubious news coverage?

I am aware that what I say below is WP:OR, but I think the official records, which are accessible online, still carry some weight. I am not suggesting to include this information into the article right away, but to look for reliable secondary sources that cover this, which we can then use:

Hazel's birth was registered in Fort Riley, Kansas, on 3 October 1894, where her father was stationed at the time.[2] The parents only moved to Arizona around 1896 or 1897.[3] Hazel M. Blauser is listed in the 1900 census as living at Fort Huachuca, Cochise, Arizona Territory, and having been born in Kansas in October 1894; and in the 1910 census as living at Elgin, Santa Cruz, Arizona, and having been born in Kansas 15 years prior. The birthplace of her younger siblings is given as Arizona in the census records. Renerpho (talk) 01:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)