Talk:Pat Nixon

Newspaper articles

I have a copy of the article, and I will post a quote from it sometime later this week. Wjhonson 16:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, that would be good. Wasted Time R 16:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

"Mrs Patricia Nixon, wife of Vice-President Richard M. Nixon, charmed our city of Seattle, when it had a brief glimpse of Mrs Richard M Nixon, and their two little daughters Patricia 12 years and Julia 10 made an overnight stop en-route from Washington D.C. to Alaska. Mrs Nixon is always reported to be gracious and friendly. And she sure is friendly. She greets a stranger as a friend. She doesn't just shake hands but clasps a visitors hand in both her hands. Her manner is direct. Slim, red-gold hair, and brown eyes. Mrs Nixon also upheld her reputation of always looking neat, no matter how long her day has been. Since she is a seasoned travelor rough weather on the flight out didn't bother her. But the Nixon daughters were air-sick most of the way. Mrs Nixon's favorite topic was their daughters. Mrs Nixon said she doesn't want their daughters to grow up too fast and doesn't think they want to either. The two Nixon daughters have been studying Alaska. "They have been studying Alaska in school said Mrs Nixon and we decided the trip would be educational for them and worth the loss of two days of school. Also they want a dog sled ride." Tricia and Julie transferred from public school to the Sidwell Friends School operated by the Quakers this Fall. The school along with all Washington D.C. schools has no segregation Mrs Nixon explained. There are Negroes in both her daughters classes. I come from the West," said Mrs Nixon "and I want my daughters to have the same belief about the wrong of segregation as I always have had. Mrs Nixon seems to thrive on her busy life. "I like it was her simple comment." Mrs Nixon gives at least two parties a weeks most of them in her 11 room house. She runs her house with the aid of a couple a Washington term for a married couple that lives in Washington D.C. The couple has two days off a week, so I put in a little of kitchen work duty said Mrs Richard M. Nixon besides my girls likes Mommies cooking best."

It's too big for the article possible, but maybe some bits can be used. Wjhonson 16:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

You need the paper's name and the date. Wasted Time R 17:04, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Seattle Times, 1 Nov 1958

Portrait painted

According to writer E. Graydon Carter in Time magazine on 7 December 1981, Pat Nixon's official WH portrait was completed in 1978 by Henriette Wyeth Hurd; it was not hung in the White House until 1981, because PN reportedly didn't want it hung until her husband's was completed and the paintings could be hung at the same time.Mowens35 19:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Assessment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 04:24, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Her name

Where does Patricia come from? Pat was a nickname, not a shortened version of her real name. For that matter, shouldn't her real name, Thelma Catherine Ryan, be included in the opening sentence? MK2 21:05, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe that may be a mistake. Pat is a common familiar form of Thelma. I know it makes no sense, but there ya go. We propably need a good source on her name being "Patricia" because it may not be true. Wjhonson 16:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

According to the National First Ladies' Library, she "assumed" the names Pat/Patricia after the death of her father. She was known as Pat from childhood, due to her birth on the eve of St. Patrick's Day. Nothing I have found indicates that she legally changed her name to Patricia. Also in a 1959 New York Times profile of the future First Lady, her name is given, in the headline, as Thelma Ryan Nixon ("Diplomat in High Heels: Thelma Ryan Nixon", The New York Times, 28 July 1959, page 11). Mowens35 22:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Her legal name of Thelma is also used in the titles and text of two other New York Times profiles of Pat Nixon, one published in 1971 and another in 1972 (both of which are cited in the Wiki article).Kitchawan 20:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

"Pat is a common familiar form of Thelma" -- no it isn't. It's remarkable that some people will get a thought in their head and then proclaim it as fact. "I know it makes no sense, but there ya go" -- there ya go fabricating. -- 98.108.199.69 (talk) 17:48, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Spelling

What's the correct spelling of "Catherine" in her name...we have 2 versions in article. BostonRed 20:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of November 6, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: one sentence need work: "On a trip to Venezuela, their limousine was pelted with rocks, and the Nixons were spat upon as representatives of the U.S. government, but Pat Nixon's warm personality and calm, even stoic public demeanor, then and later, won her much admiration." I would split and clean up commas;

 Done Happyme22 05:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

2. Factually accurate?: well-referenced

3. Broad in coverage?: mostly, but the first time Pat Nixon was mentioned in a nationwide address was the "Checkers speech" (September 23, 1952) which has numerous references to Pat and their daughters... I would include that in the marriage and family section (the photo is from that speech) or the campaign section, as this speech was during Nixon's 1952 campaign for VP. The campaign section is light for a candidate's wife, where the candidate ran for national office 5 times in 30 years...

 Done - The campain section was meant to focus on Pat Nixon's time after she was Second Lady to before she became First Lady. Anyway, I have added about the checker's speech. Happyme22 05:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

4. Neutral point of view?: it is balanced and fair

5. Article stability? quite stable

6. Images?: all are free or contain appropriate rationales

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far.— Argos'Dad 04:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I have taken care of the two matters listed here. This article should be good to go. Thanks, Happyme22 05:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Well it's probably a bit rude of me to butt in, but I have to say that I don't think the article is NPOV at all, since to being with, the dominant source is a book written by the daughter of the stubject. There is also a lot of unsourced parts, eg "Pat Nixon's warm personality and calm, even stoic, public demeanor won her much admiration. With her non-political image as loyal wife and dutiful mother, Pat was difficult to dislike, even by Nixon's fiercest critics." - which is POV. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I second Bln's concerns - the article should not be passed whilst Eisenhower's book is a prominent reference. — H₂O —  08:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

It is a fair biography of her mother. It contains much info about Mrs. Nixon because it is written by her daughter; it contains quotes from Pat as well as valuable information about her time as FL. Yes, I can see how that info is POV, and I have gone over the article thoroughly. If you see anything else, please feel free to remove it. Happyme22 15:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

It would have been better if one of you had chosen to review the article for the month that it sat nominated as a Good Article. I understand your concern about a daughter's book representing POV, however, it is not always the case. See, e.g., Mommie Dearest. In this case, I think the aspect that must drive a decision on POV is whether there are other critical and different views that could be included. I found and recommend incorporating the following:

• She was the first to disclose publicly her pro-choice view on abortion in reaction to questions on the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision. Before she even began unrelentingly to lobby her husband to name a woman to the Supreme Court, she called for such an appointment publicly. She even became the first First Lady to appear publicly in pants and model them for a national magazine, reflecting the radical change in women's attire that critics derided as masculine. Still, Pat Nixon valued her identity as a middle-class homemaker, supportive wife and devoted mother and was often depicted as the quintessential traditionalist in relief to the popular persona of the "liberated woman." www.firstladies.org

 Done Happyme22 01:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• The Arrogance of Power: The Secret World of Richard Nixon seems indicates that Pat Nixon was a "secret smoker". That may be relevant and is presented as a criticism. The insinuation of Oliver Stone in the movie "Nixon" that Pat was an alcoholic (a point discussed in Stephen Ambrose's book Nixon, but with thin support, it seems) could also be mentioned to balance the article.

See below. Happyme22 01:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I believe that your raising the question of POV at this point is relevant and will seek to have the editors address it, and as has been suggested, please add any published criticisms or alternative views that you know of. Argos'Dad 20:37, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

After talking about this with another editor previously, we could find no credible source that Mrs. Nixon was an alcoholic. We could include spectualtion accounts, I supppose, for balance but the page number for that book is necessary. And yes, Pat was a occasional smoker; we have mentioned that in the later life section. Happyme22 01:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

In the absence of further discussion, I am going to promote this article as a Good Article based on my review of the criteria. Argos'Dad 00:35, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

References

Would be good to find another, more distanced biography to enhance the article. A beloved and protective daughter's reminiscences cannot be relied upon entirely, however well-reviewed the book.Kitchawan 00:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

A great source has been the First Lady Biographic Info, but I would agree that a better variety is needed. Happyme22 00:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Views on Abortion

The link to the First Ladies Library states that Pat Nixon was pro-choice; however, the only verifiable comment I can find from her is decidedly mixed, even nervous, and was said during a news conference at the White House in 1972. Can anyone find a verifiable pro-choice comment for her? Because if it's the comment cited in the UPI report published in the New York Times, she only said, "I'm really not for abortion. It is a personal thing". Which isn't exactly the same thing as a pro-choice statement.Kitchawan 20:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Succession

Pat Nixon was NOT succeeded by Lady Bird Johnson as First Lady. She was succeeded by Betty Ford. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.187.51.51 (talk) 17:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Correct, and that is what is stated in the article. She was succeeded by Lady Bird Johnson as Second Lady of the US, however. Happyme22 (talk) 04:19, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Siege of Fort Stevens

Several Times you have cited that Pat Nixon was the first First Lady to visit a combat zone. My source is http://americancivilwar.com/statepic/dc/dc001.html. Toward the end of this web site it states "On July 12, 1864, President Abraham Lincoln went out to Fort Stevens with his wife and other officers and stood on the parapet...." If this website is true, then Pat Nixon was not the first First Lady to visit a combat zone. Mary Todd Lincoln was the first First Lady in 1864. Pat Nixon may have been the second or third. I am also looking for hard evidence that First Lady, Dolly Payne Madison was also at a combat zone but have only found accounts of how she removed Paintings and documents from the White House before the British Troops arrived. Dolley Payne Madison was never in a combat zone but Mary Todd Lincoln was according to some accounts. There was no Press with cameras during the Civil War unlike the Vietnam War to record such an event but that does not diminish the fact that the Siege of Fort Stevens was a combat zone. User:Squirrel06 --Squirrel06 (talk) 14:51, 31 January 2008 (UTC) 06:48 31 January 2008

Well I have this very reliable source that states Mrs. Nixon was the first First Lady to visit a combat zone. I find this to be more credible because, as you yourself stated, there was no press that followed the first lady around during the Civil War. Happyme22 (talk) 20:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Graduate Studies

On Pat's page, it says that she is the 1st first lady to hold a graduate degree. On Hillary CLinton's page, it says that she is the 1st first lady to hold a graduate degree. Why the inconsistency? Which one is it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sopm (talk • contribs) 02:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

We have discussed this at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Pat_Nixon, where User:Wasted Time R has said that he will do some investigating into the matter. Until we get this sorted out, perhaps we should remove it from both pages? --Happyme22 (talk) 02:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm still looking at this. One problem is the definition of "graduate degree"; by some meanings this means just a four-year undergraduate degree. But that can't be what the NFLL bio is claiming, because for example Jackie Kennedy and Lady Bird Johnson both had B.A.'s. So they must mean "post-graduate". But I haven't yet been able to find where the NFLL's "University of Southern California, 1934 -1937, education and student training classes, B.S. Merchandising, with a certificate to teach at the high school level which USC gave the equivalence of a Master's degree" comes from. Their bibliography is 7 pages long, with no indication of which item sources this. (This is why when FAC complaints come in about our excessive footnoting, I pay lip service but mostly ignore them; the tighter the footnoting, the better!) In New Jersey, at least, you don't need a masters to teach high school, so I'm a little suspicious that this certificate's equivalence may have been trumped out by some newspaper writer or biographer. In any case, I haven't forgotten this item, and will keep working on it. Wasted Time R (talk) 02:55, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, here's what I've found:

1. The NFLL statement "Pat Nixon was the first First Lady to earn a graduate degree" is puzzling. On another page, http://www.firstladies.org/DidYouKnow.htm, they amplify this with: "Which first lady was the first first lady to earn a graduate degree? Pat Nixon was the first United States First Lady to earn a graduate degree. Following four years of study at the University of Southern California she graduated and became a teacher. She continued to teach for the first year of her marriage." This seems to imply "graduate degree" means bachelor's. But Pat Nixon was not at all the first First Lady to get a bachelor's; Lady Bird Johnson, Jackie Kennedy, Lou Hoover, Grace Coolidge, and probably some others had done so. So I don't know what they're trying to say here.
2. Regarding Pat Nixon's "equivalence of a Masters". I checked all the books in the Bibliography in this article, as well as a few more on First Ladies. Most just say she received a B.S. in merchandising and a teaching certificate as well. The Anthony book gives the "equivalent of a Masters" bit and footnotes the Julie Nixon bio. So the Julie Nixon bio is the source of this. There, on page 48, she writes: "... as graduation neared she grew convinced the long apprenticeship as an assistant buyer at a very low salary was impractical. Her chosen alternative was teaching. In the past three years, she had carefully accumulated twenty-five hours in education and a semester of student training as well. ... Two months before graduation, Pat Ryan went to the Bureau of Teacher Placement at the university and filled out numerous school applications, noting on each that USC was accrediting her with a Special Credential, equivalent to a master's degree, because of her extensive business and job experience." She then did take a teaching job, giving typing and shorthand classes in Whittier Union High School.

So what do we have? It seems to me she did undergraduate work in teaching, in addition to the undergrad work she did in merchandising. But USC gave her this Special Credential to also reflect the considerable work experience she already had. Did they really consider it the equivalent of a master's, or was that Pat's own assessment of it on her application forms? I wouldn't blame her if the latter, talk about someone who'd been through the School of Hard Knocks ... but assuming that USC really did consider it an equivalent, it's still seems true that she never entered a master's level program. Therefore in terms of who is the first First Lady with a post-graduate degree, I still think it's Hillary.

The first first lady to enter into that level program probably was Hillary, though I don't think we can pass up the fact that Pat did earn the equivalent of a master's degree. I really don't have much else to say on this matter, but your work is much appreciated and I'm hoping you'll make the call -- where do we go from here? Happyme22 (talk) 03:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Am still doing some looking around. For now, I've changed the cite on the 'equivalent' to the Julie Nixon bio, since that's the original underlying source for this. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:17, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Nonsense line removed

I just removed this line:

Privately, Pat felt that the power within her husband's staff was increasing, so he was becoming more removed.(ref name="csa203"/)

Whose power? Does this mean "the power of her husband's staff"? If so, why would that cause him to be more removed? If anyone can rephrase this so it's grammatically correct please do - I can't because I don't know what it's trying to say. Tempshill (talk) 20:44, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Mrs. Nixon felt that the power of her husband's staff was increasing, and he (President Nixon) was becoming more removed from what was going on in the administration. I'll attempt a reword. Happyme22 (talk) 22:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - that's much clearer. If you know the context, it'd be useful to expand it slightly; it is a curious statement. Their power was increasing compared to what; and how? Does it mean that the President's staff was taking more matters into their own hands, and taking away authority from the President? That's how I read it, and it'd be clearer if the statement were a little more explicit. Thanks - Tempshill (talk) 00:06, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Signatures

Raster Vector

I think we should use the vector image in place of the raster. Honestly, the raster image has severe quality issues, I believe should be replaced. Both are nearly identical, why should it be a big deal? Connormah (talk) 16:18, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

From a far glance, yeah, perhaps the two look similar, but when one examines the vector image closer, significant errors made while attempting to trace the image can easily be found. The curve is not correct on the P; the a goes too far down; the N looks like an M, as the line goes down in the vector image for the i, while it goes up in the original (third curve in); the curve isn't as high as the original on the x; the o isn't a complete circle. The fact that the vector image, when examined looks different from the raster original image is what bothers me. If you can create an exact copy of the first image in SVG format, I will wholeheartedly support adding it in. But the vector image above has too many flaws. Happyme22 (talk) 18:24, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I've loaded a new SVG (shown above right; previous comments refer to the older version). If you feel this is better than the .jpg, please edit the article to show the .svg at an appropriate size. If not then I will understand the case for preferring an actual picture, however blurred, to an artist's impression. Certes (talk) 10:19, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Calling her by her first name

I think this looks vacuous and patronizing. We should refer to her as Nixon, Pat Nixon, or she, whichever causes the least ambiguity. Calling her by her first name makes the article sound like it was written by a teenage girl. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies appears to back me up. --John (talk) 08:46, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

John, WP:SURNAME "Family members with the same surname" is explicitly designed for this kind of situation, and permits the use of a first name reference. Otherwise there are just too many ambiguous or awkward wordings that result. Obviously you can look at any individual first name reference and decide if it is necessary or not, but overall, this is the rule that allows it. A number of "political spouse" BLPs are FA or GA that take advantage of this. Another point is that if you look at any real book biography of these subjects, you will see many first name references too, so it's not just 'teenage girls' who do it. Wasted Time R (talk) 10:33, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

When I read WP:SURNAME I see "When referring to the person who is the subject of the article, use just the surname unless the reference is part of a list of family members or if use of the surname alone will be confusing." How does that support the interpretation you are making of it? --John (talk) 13:08, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, look at this text after your change: 'At the time the Watergate scandal broke to the media, Nixon "barely noticed" the reports of a break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters.[63] Later, when asked by the press about Watergate, she replied curtly, "I know only what I read in the newspapers."[64]' I could read that as Richard barely noticing the break-in reports, and consequently Pat giving the dismissive response when asked about it. So to me this meets the "use of the surname alone will be confusing" exception. Ditto sentences like 'Historian Carl Sferrazza Anthony noted that ordinary citizens responded to Nixon.' Other changes you made seem okay to me, although some editors object to paragraphs that use "he" or "she" from the start without a refreshed referent. Wasted Time R (talk) 02:08, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Agree completely with Wasted. And as to the red link in my last edit summary, I was in a hurry and simply double-bracketed the entire link by mistake, which is why it appeared red. The following is what I was referencing: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biographies#Family_members_with_the_same_surname. Happyme22 (talk) 04:58, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I accept completely the difficulty of avoiding ambiguity here, and I apologise for the snarky edit summary. We are all looking at WP:SURNAME now and deciding how best to make it work on this article. I do still think very strongly that just saying "Pat" is lazy and weak. Let's keep thinking about it. --John (talk) 10:48, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect profession

Pat Nixon was not an economist, as is listed under "Profession." Neither by academic training nor by vocation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sushollister (talk • contribs) 17:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

She was a price analyst and an economic analyst for the OPA during WWII. I've made that clear in the article text and reworked the infobox. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:53, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Wrong Winterthur link

The link from 'Winterthur' (where police were trained as tour guides on Mrs Nixon's instructions) should surely have gone to the museum in Winterthur, Delaware, but instead it goes to the city of Winterthur in Switzerland - which admittedly has plenty of museums, but I can't believe she sent US police all the way over there! Of course you can find the correct article on the disambiguation page, but perhaps someone with the necessary editing skills can fix this so the link goes straight to the right place. This is a terribly common kind of error on Wikipedia - as if the software simply selects the first name on the disambiguation list (which in this case is the Swiss city). Is there some way to alter the central editing function so that people are made aware of the available alternatives before creating a link?92.111.250.34 (talk) 14:49, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Now fixed, thanks for the spot. As for the general problem, there is a bot that will tell you if you include a link to a disambig page, but not if you include a link to a wrong regular page as in this case. Careful writers try to check that their links are really to what they think they are to. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:15, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pat Nixon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080720114321/http://www.nixonlibraryfoundation.org:80/index.php?submenu=museum&src=gendocs&link=MuseumTour to http://www.nixonlibraryfoundation.org/index.php?link=MuseumTour&src=gendocs&submenu=museum

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:36, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pat Nixon. 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/20120212202653/http://millercenter.org/academic/americanpresident/nixon/essays/firstlady to http://millercenter.org/academic/americanpresident/nixon/essays/firstlady

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) 19:42, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pat Nixon. 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/20071109115002/http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/34_eisenhower/psources/ps_checkers.html to https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/34_eisenhower/psources/ps_checkers.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) 19:43, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

2016 Time article about Pat Nixon

Here is a 2016 Time article By her granddaughter. I hope this is useful -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

MOS:JOBTITLES back-and-forth

From what I understand from the manual of style, the title should be capitalized when standing alone and unmodified. In the first sentence, the word "the" precedes it, so it's not capitalized. But "served as" in the next sentence seems to point to the title itself, i.e., "Second Lady..." should be capitalized. I could easily have this wrong, and these titles have been changed back and forth in so many articles that I don't want to start mucking it up further. Anyone have a clear idea about this? - Special-T (talk) 15:28, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

I just re-checked the manual of style and changed these to caps (& took out "the"). - Special-T (talk) 22:00, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

"Patricia"?

Should her name in the infobox be "Pat Nixon"? Her name was never "Patricia"—she was always (AFAIK) referred to by her childhood nickname of "Pat". - Special-T (talk) 15:31, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

"From" cats

Alansohn, you should remove those three from cats I originally removed because Nixon's only association was that she just lived there. Being from does mean born and raised there. How can her living in New Jersey and the Upper West Side classify that she's from these places? That's like saying you're from D.C. because you moved there from your original home town. That does not mean the person from D.C. originally or grew up there during an early or significant portion of one's life. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:21, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

• WikiCleanerMan, "From" is open ended. It's not "People born in Foo". It's not "People raised in Foo". It's not "People born and raised in Foo". The use of "People from Foo" indicates that it's not limited to born and / or raised. I encourage you to provide any Wikipedia policy or consensus that supports your idiosyncratic insistence that someone can only be from the place in which they were born. Until then, the status quo ante has been restored. Alansohn (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

From is not open-ended. From has an exact meaning. You have to prove that it's not limited to those born and/or raised there. The majority of bio articles have this where it is limited to born and raised there because those cats directly apply to the scope of the article. Many people have lived in the Upper West Side. Doesn't mean all are from there. Nixon just lived there in later years. That's the only connection. Not from there. Just because those cats have that sentence on the cat page doesn't mean that it's so. There is no policy or consensus that says either toward your argument. Your restoration isn't valid until this discussion has come to an agreement. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:01, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

• • WikiCleanerMan the edits have been longstanding here and the usage is exactly the same in thousands upon thousands of other articles. The status quo ante has been restored and I look forward to you providing any evidence supporting your claim that "from" means "born and raised in". Please provide anything to back your claim that the validly sourced categories should be removed and perhaps consensus might change. Alansohn (talk) 14:39, 30 October 2022 (UTC)