Possible addition to the 'named after' section - one of the University buildings on Nottingham Trent University's Clifton campus is named Ada Byron King. 80.156.44.33 ( talk) 09:18, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
The article states:
The questionable typographical quotation marks aside (this is such a typical "I wrote an essay for a class, and then cross-posted it to Wikipedia" sentence), it contributes nothing to the article.
It so happens that the subject of Annabella's preceding sentence is "the child". The noun "child" is of neuter gender, the third-person pronoun of which is "it". Referring to "the child" as "it" was, and is, perfectly correct English.
Given that context, there is absolutely nothing wrong with "I talk to it for your satisfaction,...." Unless, that is, one intends to vilify the mother, as the rest of the paragraph in the article does. But the implicit "Ooooh, the horrid mother referred to the child as 'it'" is just 21st century self-righteousness that simply does not apply to the 19th century. As Woolley states in the very next sentence (and look up what Dorothy Stein had to say about the "it" sentence), "for Annabella, motherhood existed only in the abstract, as a medium for expressing her virtues and justifying her actions." This is equally true for any noblewoman of the period. To some degree, it still is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.8.89.179 ( talk) 17:58, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the second paragraph, the sentence "She had no relationship with her father, who separated from her mother just a month after Ada was born, and four months later he left England forever and her farther died in Greece in 1823 when she was eight." Has a typo in it.
"her farther" in that sentence should, I think, be "her father"
The sentence could be improved by removing the two works completely as they are unnecessary. Kitschweb ( talk) 14:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the article's second paragraph, there is a better way to phrase the second sentence: "She had no relationship with her father, who separated from her mother just a month after Ada was born, left England forever four months later, and died in Greece in 1823 when she was eight." Regards, Degradia ( talk) 08:09, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Someone should find a link to her notes. If this is the first computer program it would be very interesting to read. — [ Unsigned comment added by 38.113.183.93 ( talk • contribs).] 14:16, 9 March 2010
Why the quotes in First "computer program"? Slartibartfastibast ( talk) 21:55, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change:
to:
because:
Dima-Ofek ( talk) 04:24, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
I haven't changed any of the page's content as such, but I have made several rearrangements to the existing content. Before I did this, the article jumped back and forth through her life in a few places, and there was a lot of repetition. This gave the article an unpolished, amateur feel, and it was confusing to read. I think my rearrangements have put things in a more logical order and have hopefully clarified some of the sections I was initially confused by. I'm happy to discuss further if anyone wants.
I've also used the name "Ada" instead of "Lovelace" in some places. I did this initially before reading the discussion above (sorry - I'm new to editing Wikipedia and I didn't realise it would have been best to read the previous discussions first; I won't make that mistake again). I understand the points above about "Ada" appearing to be less respectful than "Lovelace", and about inconsistency with using both names at different places, however I think my name changes make sense, at least to some extent. Happy to hear disagreements. :) Here's my reasons for the name choices I made:
- When I first read the article, I was a little confused by all the different names and by who was related to whom (Lord Byron's affairs don't help with this!) I found it odd that Ada Lovelace was being referred to as "Lovelace" during her childhood when she only took on that name upon marriage. I felt that using "Ada" for her early years makes more sense.
- I started using "Lovelace" after she married, except where it wouldn't be clear whether "Lovelace" referred to Ada or her husband. For example, immediately after the description of her marriage, the article originally talked about "Lovelace" being sick, and about "Lovelace's mother". Nothing in the context made it immediately obvious without any doubt which Lovelace it referred to (e.g., it could have been Ada'a husband's mother that told her about Lord Byron's incest instead of Ada's own mother). I know that if her husband was being discussed, then he would probably always be referred to by a more formal title than "Lovelace", but people who are new to English peerage conventions might not realise this and hence might have trouble working out whether "Lovelace" referred to the husband or wife.
- I used "Lovelace" or "Ada Lovelace" exclusively when talking about her post-marriage work with Charles Babbage. I know this is inconsistent with using "Ada" earlier, but I introduced this section by initially using "Ada Lovelace", so I think the transition from "Ada" to "Lovelace" won't be too startling.
- The External links section has two references that refer to Ada Lovelace merely as "Ada". It seems that this is not an unacceptable naming convention for her in modern literature. Thus I don't believe that calling her "Ada" in the article is disrespectful, especially when it lends clarity to the article.
Lady alys ( talk) 12:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Ada Augusta Byron married William King, the 8th Baron King. As such, her surname changed from Byron to King. If she had lived in America, she would have been known as Ada King or Mrs. King. When he was created the 1st Earl Lovelace, that title superseded "Baron King" and became her title as well ("the Countess Lovelace"). Since her husband was a peer, he would have been known as Lord Lovelace or merely "Lovelace", just as Ada's father (also a peer) was known as Lord Byron or "Byron". To refer to Ada Augusta Byron King as "Lovelace" is absurd; it was her title, NOT her surname. The wife of an Earl is called a Countess, and is addressed as "Lady Lovelace" not because "Lovelace" is her surname, but because it is her husband's title. She would never have been addressed as "Lady Ada", nor would anyone have called her "Lovelace". The prep-school attitude of Wikipedia, which calls people by their surnames even if those people would never have been called by their surnames in their lifetimes, only adds confusion to the debate. For the sake of clarity, she should be called "Ada". If that's too hard to swallow, call her "Lady Lovelace", just as we call her father "Lord Byron" rather than "George" or "George Byron". But don't, for the love of heraldry, call her "Lovelace" or "Ada Lovelace". Neither usage is correct. Munchkyn ( talk) 22:58, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
I think it's worth noting that the Guardian, for example here, and the Financial Times, for example here, refer to her as "Lovelace". (Of course, Wikipedia isn't the Guardian or the Financial Times and doesn't use their style guides, but it shows that respected British publications accept Lovelace as her last name -- it's not "American ignorance of English titles" or "prep-school attitude".) I do think it's mildly disrespectful to refer to her by her first name when she's an adult and there's no need for disambiguation with another Lovelace. It's also ironic that it'd happen in an article for a woman known for her contribution to a traditionally male field, who's likely to be a hero to young women and girls. There's no analogous situation where, if the situations were reversed, they'd see a male subject referred to by his first name throughout the article. (But I'm just noting that this is ironic; Wikipedia policy shouldn't necessarily be based on equality between the sexes. My main point is that Lovelace is accepted by respectable sources to be used as her last name.) I prefer "Lovelace" or "Lady Lovelace". M-1 ( talk) 08:08, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Possible addition to the 'named after' section - one of the University buildings on Nottingham Trent University's Clifton campus is named Ada Byron King. 80.156.44.33 ( talk) 09:18, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
The article states:
The questionable typographical quotation marks aside (this is such a typical "I wrote an essay for a class, and then cross-posted it to Wikipedia" sentence), it contributes nothing to the article.
It so happens that the subject of Annabella's preceding sentence is "the child". The noun "child" is of neuter gender, the third-person pronoun of which is "it". Referring to "the child" as "it" was, and is, perfectly correct English.
Given that context, there is absolutely nothing wrong with "I talk to it for your satisfaction,...." Unless, that is, one intends to vilify the mother, as the rest of the paragraph in the article does. But the implicit "Ooooh, the horrid mother referred to the child as 'it'" is just 21st century self-righteousness that simply does not apply to the 19th century. As Woolley states in the very next sentence (and look up what Dorothy Stein had to say about the "it" sentence), "for Annabella, motherhood existed only in the abstract, as a medium for expressing her virtues and justifying her actions." This is equally true for any noblewoman of the period. To some degree, it still is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.8.89.179 ( talk) 17:58, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the second paragraph, the sentence "She had no relationship with her father, who separated from her mother just a month after Ada was born, and four months later he left England forever and her farther died in Greece in 1823 when she was eight." Has a typo in it.
"her farther" in that sentence should, I think, be "her father"
The sentence could be improved by removing the two works completely as they are unnecessary. Kitschweb ( talk) 14:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the article's second paragraph, there is a better way to phrase the second sentence: "She had no relationship with her father, who separated from her mother just a month after Ada was born, left England forever four months later, and died in Greece in 1823 when she was eight." Regards, Degradia ( talk) 08:09, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Someone should find a link to her notes. If this is the first computer program it would be very interesting to read. — [ Unsigned comment added by 38.113.183.93 ( talk • contribs).] 14:16, 9 March 2010
Why the quotes in First "computer program"? Slartibartfastibast ( talk) 21:55, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change:
to:
because:
Dima-Ofek ( talk) 04:24, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
I haven't changed any of the page's content as such, but I have made several rearrangements to the existing content. Before I did this, the article jumped back and forth through her life in a few places, and there was a lot of repetition. This gave the article an unpolished, amateur feel, and it was confusing to read. I think my rearrangements have put things in a more logical order and have hopefully clarified some of the sections I was initially confused by. I'm happy to discuss further if anyone wants.
I've also used the name "Ada" instead of "Lovelace" in some places. I did this initially before reading the discussion above (sorry - I'm new to editing Wikipedia and I didn't realise it would have been best to read the previous discussions first; I won't make that mistake again). I understand the points above about "Ada" appearing to be less respectful than "Lovelace", and about inconsistency with using both names at different places, however I think my name changes make sense, at least to some extent. Happy to hear disagreements. :) Here's my reasons for the name choices I made:
- When I first read the article, I was a little confused by all the different names and by who was related to whom (Lord Byron's affairs don't help with this!) I found it odd that Ada Lovelace was being referred to as "Lovelace" during her childhood when she only took on that name upon marriage. I felt that using "Ada" for her early years makes more sense.
- I started using "Lovelace" after she married, except where it wouldn't be clear whether "Lovelace" referred to Ada or her husband. For example, immediately after the description of her marriage, the article originally talked about "Lovelace" being sick, and about "Lovelace's mother". Nothing in the context made it immediately obvious without any doubt which Lovelace it referred to (e.g., it could have been Ada'a husband's mother that told her about Lord Byron's incest instead of Ada's own mother). I know that if her husband was being discussed, then he would probably always be referred to by a more formal title than "Lovelace", but people who are new to English peerage conventions might not realise this and hence might have trouble working out whether "Lovelace" referred to the husband or wife.
- I used "Lovelace" or "Ada Lovelace" exclusively when talking about her post-marriage work with Charles Babbage. I know this is inconsistent with using "Ada" earlier, but I introduced this section by initially using "Ada Lovelace", so I think the transition from "Ada" to "Lovelace" won't be too startling.
- The External links section has two references that refer to Ada Lovelace merely as "Ada". It seems that this is not an unacceptable naming convention for her in modern literature. Thus I don't believe that calling her "Ada" in the article is disrespectful, especially when it lends clarity to the article.
Lady alys ( talk) 12:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Ada Augusta Byron married William King, the 8th Baron King. As such, her surname changed from Byron to King. If she had lived in America, she would have been known as Ada King or Mrs. King. When he was created the 1st Earl Lovelace, that title superseded "Baron King" and became her title as well ("the Countess Lovelace"). Since her husband was a peer, he would have been known as Lord Lovelace or merely "Lovelace", just as Ada's father (also a peer) was known as Lord Byron or "Byron". To refer to Ada Augusta Byron King as "Lovelace" is absurd; it was her title, NOT her surname. The wife of an Earl is called a Countess, and is addressed as "Lady Lovelace" not because "Lovelace" is her surname, but because it is her husband's title. She would never have been addressed as "Lady Ada", nor would anyone have called her "Lovelace". The prep-school attitude of Wikipedia, which calls people by their surnames even if those people would never have been called by their surnames in their lifetimes, only adds confusion to the debate. For the sake of clarity, she should be called "Ada". If that's too hard to swallow, call her "Lady Lovelace", just as we call her father "Lord Byron" rather than "George" or "George Byron". But don't, for the love of heraldry, call her "Lovelace" or "Ada Lovelace". Neither usage is correct. Munchkyn ( talk) 22:58, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
I think it's worth noting that the Guardian, for example here, and the Financial Times, for example here, refer to her as "Lovelace". (Of course, Wikipedia isn't the Guardian or the Financial Times and doesn't use their style guides, but it shows that respected British publications accept Lovelace as her last name -- it's not "American ignorance of English titles" or "prep-school attitude".) I do think it's mildly disrespectful to refer to her by her first name when she's an adult and there's no need for disambiguation with another Lovelace. It's also ironic that it'd happen in an article for a woman known for her contribution to a traditionally male field, who's likely to be a hero to young women and girls. There's no analogous situation where, if the situations were reversed, they'd see a male subject referred to by his first name throughout the article. (But I'm just noting that this is ironic; Wikipedia policy shouldn't necessarily be based on equality between the sexes. My main point is that Lovelace is accepted by respectable sources to be used as her last name.) I prefer "Lovelace" or "Lady Lovelace". M-1 ( talk) 08:08, 18 December 2012 (UTC)