![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
There is not nearly enough information here on the actual murders, the motive, her life before the murders, etc. This article assumes that you already know the basics of the murders rather than explaining the murders themselves or even why people believe that Lizzy Borden killed her parents. -- Kleio08 23:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Ya, this article makes no sense. It's like doing an article on Coke that consists soley of the drink's taste. Where's the rest of it?
As in, can we get one of her here? Maxxo 01:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
As at this date there is no photo of her ? Pray, tell why not or I'm libel to start swinging something ! -- Free4It 23:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
In popular memory Lizzie Borden is widely recalled as being a teenager or even younger at the time of the murder, but, in fact, she was a grown woman in her late thirties.
How did this change in popular perception become established? Does anyone know of a song, play, movie, TV show, or other widely viewed work that might have given rise to this misconception?
I've also heard the nursery rhyme with the words "mother" and "father" switched -- indeed, the song at the end of this article uses that order. Was forensics advanced enough at the time for people to determine who was actually murdered first? Or, do we just not know? If not, perhaps a little note should be added and the words in the nursery rhyme switched in order to be aligned with the song.
I would seriously question this article's assertion that the Borden case is remembered chiefly because of the nursery rhyme. There's a whole cottage industry devoted to studying the case and speculating about what happened, and this has been going on practically since the day Lizzie was acquitted. I think the case would be famous with or without the rhyme. In fact, if anything I would say that books and programmes about the case are responsible for keeping the rhyme in modern memory (I sure never heard it on the playground). Perodicticus 16:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Does the author have an obsession for the rhyme? It's mentioned in 3 separate places. Since it's a blaitant declaration of Lizzy's guilt, without excuse, it's pretty much the same thing as O. J. Simpson's entry saying "but every one Knows he did it" every paragraph. This is hardly NPOV. I never heard it as a kid, just from reading books saying it's famous. It seems to me like it's become a situation like "Brontosaurus", which would hardly survive if people didn't keep on mentioning it's obsolete. CFLeon 00:53, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Is a loaded word like "spinster" the best we can do? According to Wikipedia's own definition, the word is value-laden pejorative - at least to some extent.
What's wrong with "unmarried?"
Seriously ... spinster?
172.130.14.32 18:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
More Stephen Colbert inspired vandalism likely; see Talk:Latchkey kid. NawlinWiki 04:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I got denied protection as "nothing has happened recently". USADude 22:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC) Update: USADude 12:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I added info about the book Lizzie written by Evan Hunter where he gives his own unique theory on who killed the Bordens. He also hosts (as Ed McBain) a video where the various historians give their own reasons who they suspect who the killer(s) were.I happened to see the video on TV (Mystery channel) recently and rather enjoyed it. Have not read Hunter's book Lizzie. L.J. Brooks 16:30 04 Sep 2006 (UTC)
...of wikilinking the standalone publication years in ISBN book references? Or the standalone years under "Artistic depictions"? Nobody's going to be clicking on 1991 to see if anything else happened that year. It's just visual clutter. It wouldn't hurt any of us to (re)read Edward Tufte, that sworn enemy of "useless, non-informative, or information-obscuring elements of information displays". -- CliffC 16:48, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
I added a {{ Fact}} tag to the section "Alleged lesbian affair with actress Nance O'Neil". Borden's sexuality gets more wiki-ink than the murders, and all I see is conjecture. The corresponding section in the Nance O'Neil article says "O'Neil's actual sexuality remains unclear." Google tells me that Borden is the only person in Wikipedia to have had an "alleged lesbian affair"; this seems like a poor choice of words without a WP:RS. -- CliffC 06:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I have to complain about Tualha's recent edits to the Lizzie Borden page. The photos are incorrect, and not Emma or Lizzie. I have changed the page back to its correct factual and photographic settings. I am a Lizzie Borden scholar, editor of The Hatchet: Journal of LIzzie Borden Studies, moderator of The Lizzie Borden Society Forum, webmaster of LizzieAndrewBorden.com, and blogger of MondoLizzie.com. I know of which I speak. Please do not continue to post false facts and images on this page. Dr. Stefani Koorey
How can you say what you do and still put up factually INACCURATE information on Lizzie Borden. You continue to revert to your version with photos that are not Lizzie, are not Emma, and with false information on the murders, the woman's life, and her social world. You are saying to me that you have SOURCES for these false statements and these photos? You have proof that what you put up is more accurate than what I have crafted?
I appreciate the lesson in references, but your continued reversion from my edit back to yours is not acceptable when your edit is incorrect.
Wikipedia is fast losing its reputation because of bouncers like you who guard the gates of an historical person such as Lizzie Borden. You know not of which you write, even though you talk a very big game about sources.
I suggest you rethink your position and check your own sources to confirm what I have been saying.
My next edit will conform to your requirements, with footnotes. If you dare to change it back to your mistake-ridden version, I will be forced to abandon all hope that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and forced to publicize it as a place for amateur historians to rule the pages of a once well-conceived web resource.
I accept that she's a pop culture icon but that doesnt' mean we need to list every unsourced passing reference. Exhibit A:
So what if the cat does? and can you prove it? I suggest interested editors cut all the loosely-associated trivia from those lists and post it here to the Talk page in case there's a nugget of notable use that someone can save. Canuckle 15:26, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
That seems like an odd way to describe someone in their lead. Do we identify Isaac Newton as an "English physicist and bachelor?" -- Aquillion 08:03, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
The lesbian section doesn't supply references. The single reference in the paragraph (straight dope) is a reference source for the sexuality of Nance O'Neil. The reference also states that Lizzie Borden being a lesbian is a matter of pure conjecture.
The reference states that 'The belief that Lizzie Borden was a lesbian basically comes down to the assumption that any woman not married by thirty must be gay.' The article was quite interesting, especially after I read the references, but was misleading on the lesbian issue (with respect to the quoted source.)
Rhodescus 01:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
"Lizzie" is short for "Elizabeth". Is her full, proper name "Elizabeth Andrew Borden"? Well, according to this website, it is. -- MosheA 21:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I've started working through the article and looking at some of the references that are in it. I hope I don't step on anyone's toes as I'm working on it. I've just got some problems with the text from where most of the citations come - Straight Dope Staff Report. Part of my problem is that at the bottom of the reference page, it says "Staff Reports are researched and written by members of the Straight Dope Science Advisory Board, Cecil's online auxiliary. Although the SDSAB does its best, these articles are edited by Ed Zotti, not Cecil, so accuracywise you'd better keep your fingers crossed." Then in the first few paragraphs, there is a major error in fact. It says that John Morse was Abby's brother, when all the actual documents from the time - inquest and trial transcripts - are clear that he was the first Mrs. Borden's brother. The other problem is that the page reads more like an essay and isn't hard on sources. In any event, I'm working on it and hope what I do meets with everyone's approval. Wildhartlivie 02:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
The band The Dresden Dolls has a song from their demo album A is for Accident about Lizzie entitled Thirty Whacks. I know a long, long list of references in music is not wanted in this article, however this song seems to be more relevant because, unlike other songs on the list, it does not merely reference Lizzie, but it supposed to be told from her POV.
Add or no?
Matt ( talk) 17:14, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
"The house is an exact replica of the Borden's house and guests actually sleep in the room Mrs. Borden was murdered in. According to local legend, not one person has made it through the night in that room. The house also has a huge attraction not only because of the Bed and Breakfast but it is believed that the house may be haunted by the ghosts of the Borden family for odd things have been known to happen in that house when whenever anyone insults the family."
Kostaki mou ( talk) 22:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Earlier today, User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) added a quote to an already existing citation from the New York Times archives regarding the purchase of prussic acid. This quote only functioned to echo what was being cited. There is nothing controversial about the inclusion of Lizzie Borden's effort to buy prussic acid. This fact is present in each and every book that has been published about this case and in all the ones listed in "Further reading", it is present on the website at the University of Missouri, Kansas City, which has Borden's inquest testimony available online, it is present at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, which has copies of all the original source documents, it is present at the LizzieAndrewBorden.com website, which is a research site investigating the case, it is present at the Crime Library, it is present on LizzieBorden.org, which is a Fall River Historical Society site. There is little, if any, chance that this piece of information will be lost if it isn't copied and pasted here. Because of this presence in every other source for this case, there is no necessity to "preserve in situ" (although copy and pasting it in a quote function on Wikipedia is not in situ preservation) the New York Times headline and/or opening paragraph, which is all that is allowable per WP guidelines due to the necessity of purchasing the article to read it further. No one has challenged the veracity of the inclusion of prussic acid, and it was already cited. I have removed this useless copy and paste quote for the reasons of redundancy, lack of necessity and that it added nothing new to the article. We thank User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) for the birthdate of Andrew Borden, but we do not need the useless quote for this prussic acid purchase attempt fact. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 01:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
The New York Times citation for the will is not acceptable. It still leads to a full page requiring membership or payment. The second source for the will is a self-published blog, which is in violation of WP:SPS. As for Borden's name, please note the discussion above at Full Name. Borden may have adapted the name Lizbeth as an affectation, but that is not her name, as she swore at her inquest. The blog citation isn't acceptable as a source for the name. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 05:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I am opening this request for comments because attempts at discussion with the other editor, User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), as noted in the above sections, has not been productive. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 09:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
To summarize the opinions offered for this issue, six individuals, myself ( Wildhartlivie), RedSpruce, AndToToToo, Kostaki mou, Pinkadelica, and Rossrs all agree that while it is valid and proper to mention the adapted name in the article, it does not belong in the lead as an assertion that it is a legal name. One individual, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) believes it belongs in the lead, and one individual, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles said it belonged in the article somewhere, but did not designate an opinion as to where. Consensus regarding this issue supports removing the mention from the lead, but leaving it later in the article. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 22:06, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) I'm a lot puzzled by changes Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) made today. When a request for comments has been opened due to a given issue, and consensus is beginning to form against the position a person takes, it would seem to me that if a compromise was reached, by definition of the word, it would first have to be reached. Instead, the editor actually trimmed the small portion of the complete abstract insertion that wasn't already covered by material in the article for which the citation was being given (ie, "for whose murder and that of her stepmother, Mrs. Abby Borden, she was tried and acquitted nearly thirty-five years ago.") and used the summary "trim quote for compromise." Since compromise means a mutual acceptance of terms, there was no compromise on this. If you want to offer a compromise, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), then offer one for discussion. Changing it slightly doesn't abate the issue. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 21:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
To summarize the opinions offered for this issue, three individuals, myself ( Wildhartlivie), John Broughton and Pinkadelica agree that the use of the quotation as it exists in this particular instance is not needed, is inappropriate, violates earlier established consensus regarding the inappropriateness of the use of quotes, as is being practiced here, and further is now being considered a violation of "fair use" by the Associated Press. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) believes this type of usage is appropriate since the parameter is present in citation templates and Biophys agrees with him. Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles offered comment which did not address the issue. Consensus, and potential prevailing legality issues, is that the inclusion of quotations used in the manner as it is in this article is not appropriate and violates fair use. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 22:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
To summarize the opinions offered for this issue: Myself ( Wildhartlivie) and AndToToToo agreed that the article, as is observed in the image currently being offered as the reference source, is titled "Prussic Acid In The Case" with the other clauses functioning as subtitles, which should not be presented as the article title. Also, the format presented in the archive is not representative of the title as it is presented in the actual article in the image. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) offered his interpretation that the entire group of clauses is the article title. Consensus is that the title is "Prussic Acid In The Case." Wildhartlivie ( talk) 22:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I am broaching these issues for input from the Wikipedia community to clarify these issues per a consensus. Thanks. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 08:35, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
To summarize opinions offered about this issue: Myself ( Wildhartlivie) and AndToToToo agreed that the change of citation from the original newspaper source to a clipped image of the same article was unnecessary. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) stands by his change. Pinkadelica and Rossrs saw no difference in the citations. Consensus was not reached on the disposition of this issue, thus the change will stand. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 23:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Would it be considered appropriate to add a section for other theories, such as Arnold Brown's view that the murders were committed by Lizzie Borden's illegitimate half-brother? PatrickLMT ( talk) 18:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I removed the the word "spinster" from the opening paragraph as even wiki's page on it says it's an insult. Just seemed inappropriate. 68.166.172.84 ( talk) 00:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I disagree with the reasoning for keeping spinster in the opening sentence, and the opinion of Wildhartlivie hardly consistutes a "consensus". It is considered an insulting term. Applying this reasoning, does that make it OK to refer to afro-americans using terms that are no longer acceptable (the n word), were during their lifetime? 165.189.169.190 ( talk) 15:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
What's about Lizzies childhood ? Her mother died at the age of 39 or 40. Lizzie was three years old.
The childhood possible give informations about Lizzies charakter. -- AndreaMimi ( talk) 11:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Well, well I'll look at this paragraphe and read them exactly. I thank you for yor answer and wish you a nice weekend.
"character" - yes, I know. But my A-Level is to long ago and my english not perfect. -- AndreaMimi ( talk) 09:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Would anyone object to Minette Walters' "The Sculptress" being included under the prose fiction header? http://www.ciao.co.uk/The_Sculptress_Minette_Walters__Review_5438087 62.113.159.156 ( talk) 12:17, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Request the addition of the play 40 Whacks currently running at the Annoyance Theater in Chicago, IL. The Annoyance is a well known in the fringe theater circuit, as well as having such well known shows as "Coed Prison Sluts" and "Splatter Theatre", the show is has recieved rave reviews from the Chicago press. Not allowing the addition of 40 Whacks is a great disservice to those interested in the fringe theater movement.
- Request the addition of the play 40 Whacks currently running at the Annoyance Theater in Chicago, IL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.251.58 ( talk) 05:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Regarding 40 Whacks at the Annoyance theater, it is highly recommended by the Chicago Reader: http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/40-whacks/Event?oid=1888046 by New City: http://newcitystage.com/2010/06/21/review-40-whacksannoyance-theatre/ by the Chicago Theater Blog, Chicago Stage Review and an article on the creators was published here: http://chicago.metromix.com/theater/article/killer-comedy/1980507/content
- I'd like to request the addition of the new play 40 Whacks opening at the Annoyance Theater ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annoyance_Theatre) on June 18th as part of the Just for Laughs Festival. Show info from the JFL page: http://www.justforlaughschicago.com/justforlaughschicago/stories/story/0,,218860,00.html
Would anyone object to the addition of Word for Word's 2003 production of Angela Carter's "The Fall River Axe Murders"? Information can be found on-line here: http://www.zspace.org/press.htm -- JLSQ ( talk) 00:42, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry I wasn't clear. My intention was to ask if the addition of Word for Word's performance be added, not the article whose link I included. The link was to provide information that might help with the decision making process. -- JLSQ ( talk) 05:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I was just wondering whether a reference to the Series 2 Living Dead Doll of Lizzie Borden should be included in the cultural references section. (Mezco Toyz also made a headknocker figure and later, in 2004, a miniaturised version of the Lizzie Borden doll). The doll's hairstyle and costume were clearly based on photographs of Lizzie Borden, and came with a death certificate bearing Borden's real life death date and the traditional "Lizzie Borden took an axe" rhyme.
If it would be appropriate to be included, it seems to require a new header under the references section for "Other" as it doesn't fit under the other media sub-headings. Thanks for your thoughts.
Mabalu ( talk) 13:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
The concern is whether the line removed [6] here should be included or not. It has been removed and readded more than once. 130.101.100.107 ( talk) 14:03, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
It establishes that Correira couldn't have committed the murder. It establishes that Correira's murder helped establish doubt. The article doesn't contend that this is the reason, or the sole reason, that Borden was acquitted. What do you propose that the addition that the jury didn't know this adds to that? The article actually outlines that reasonable doubt already existed for the acquittal:
If the contention is that the reason Borden was acquitted was due to the Correira murder, the phrase you want to add would be more relevant. The article only states that the existence of another murderer helped solidify reasonable doubt. It doesn't need additional reinforcement to prove Correira did not do it, it already establishes that. I can't see that the phrase adds anything. LaVidaLoca ( talk) 15:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
In the "Television and Film" of the "Borden and Culture" section; Borden should be mentioned for her appearance on the jury of a mock trial of Homer Simpson in The Simpsons Treehouse of Horror IV, episode 1F04. This is of note as The Simpsons are arguably one of the greatest pop culture icons of the late 20th / early 21st century. Gabe0463 ( talk) 18:11, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Someone replaced an authentic photo of Lizzie with a picture of someone else. (Even if this were Lizzie, the date (c. 1889) would certainly be wrong. Lizzie was 29 that year. This woman is obviously far too young.) Kostaki mou ( talk) 02:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone have a credible reference for the fact that the hatch and Lizzie Borden's fathers skull was found in the attic of Lizzie Borden's attorney's house (by his daughter) around the 1960s - it was on history's lost and found http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXAIKMLPvI —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.20.104.221 ( talk) 06:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
The correct answer to all of this is that the "skulls" displayed at the trial, and which could have remained in the possession of Lizzie's Lawyers and been displayed elsewhere afterward, were plaster casts, not the genuine articles. After the autopsies the heads of the 2 corpses were detatched, boiled, and the skin removed, then the casts were taken and the skulls buried in the appropriate graves, though above the original caskets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ClarkSavageJr ( talk • contribs) 15:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Where can I find any information or Lizzy Borden Uncle John..... And did anyone investigated him whatsoever........... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.136.226.192 ( talk) 20:42, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone object to adding Avram Davidson's short story "The Deed of the Deft-Footed Dragon", which is entirely about Lizzie, and offers a novel (if unprovable) theory?
(The Chinese laundryman did it; he was a killer for a tong, relocated to get him away from rival tongs and the cops; Lizzie had helped his daughter in his charitable work, and he overheard her step-mother's plans to cheat her.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:22, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
The 1976 BBC series “Second Verdict” looked at the case, with a dramatised reconstruction of some events. This series was unusual, in that it took the format of a discussion between two (fictional) detectives from the “Softly Softly” police series - Det. Chief Supt. Charlie Barlow, played by Stratford Johns, and Det. Chief Supt. John Watt, played by Frank Windsor - looking at the evidence of six cases where a verdict had either not been reached, or was controversial. Rosemary Leach played Lizzie. Sadly, Barlow and Watt reached a “verdict” in only one case (and not this one!) leading to Johns lamenting that they should have called the programme “Second Opinion”. The Wikipedia article on the series is here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Verdict. Jock123 ( talk) 20:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
I think this whole section needs to be removed. It doesn't add any references, maybe one, not sure, but surely this section is trivia that isn't needed in an encyclopedia. Thoughts? -- CrohnieGal Talk 10:46, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
During the inquest and the trial the accused was asked if she owns a seal skin sack. This word is not common today, and not many will wear any seal skin product. Minus the fact that there are no longer quality seal furs to be had. The reader here is told it was a cloak under "Motive and Methods." The proper word, regardless of the sites insistance on "cloak" is a "Seal Skin Sacque." The brutal Americanization of the word sacque to sack is what probably makes this wiki article incomplete. Miss Borden told the inquest that she would not put acid on any seal skin. These items were only bought by wealthy people and treated like diamonds. The inquisitor and the recorder wrote the word "sack" but she was cultered enough to know they were trying to say sacque. She went on to state that she didn't even know where the drug store was, and never went there in her life. Obviously this was not checked, as the evidence was not material to the crime, although it could show she was a liar. In any case, a sacque (sack) is more like a jacket. It has hooks on the front instead of buttons, and the garment is normally kept short to the waist to enhance a womans figure. The otherwise juvenile translation of a sacque to a cloak is like calling a diamond a rock. 99.202.144.103 ( talk) 20:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I have added this play to the theater section as it is, by far, the most notable depiction of the Lizzy Borden character to date, and the section was lacking, given that it mentions numerous obscure productions, but was missing it's most notable.( 75.69.241.91 ( talk) 04:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC))
Obviously, the character is based on Lizzie Borden, and of course the character is not named 'Lizzie Borden'. Your argument is akin to stating that Charlie Chaplin's character in The Great Dictator is not Adolph Hitler, which is true technically. Hart and Kaufman both stated that the character was based on Borden. It remains the best known depiction, fictionalized or not,in a play (not a television movie from the 1970s, which has nothing to do with anything, and which you could also argue was fictionalized!) and that stands true to this very day. To not include 'The Man Who Came to Dinner' in the theater section is absolutely absurd. In the interest of fictionalizing the story somewhat, Fall River, Massachusetts was changed to Gloucester, Massachusetts and "Lizzie Borden took an axe" became "Harriet Sedley took an axe". I'd be willing to note that the character is a fictionalized character based on Borden, and not a direct depiction, but it still stands as factual that Lizzie Borden was the inspiration for Harriet Sedley.
If your argument was that it may not be the "most notable", that still would not justify your deletion of it. The proper protocol would have been to request a citation instead of unilaterally deleting an item. And while we are on that, I'm quite sure a play that was a Broadway success in 1939, has had numerous television adaptations, a major motion picture, and has had numerous revivals on Broadway, including one with Nathan Lane in 2000, and has been released on DVD, and shown repeatedly on cable television is easily more notable than the other, frankly obscure, plays mentioned in the section.
As for the reference to the Elizabeth Montgomery television movie, that TV movie has no relevance to what we are discussing.
Are you seriously arguing that those hardly known plays are more notable than a Hart/Kaufman classic that is performed to this day??
And are you really stating that Harriet Sedley is NOT based on Lizzie Borden, and merits no inclusion in the Theater section??
Biographical entries in Wikipedia regularly note when the biographical subjects have been used as clear inspiration for fictionalized characters. 75.69.241.91 ( talk) 03:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC))
Television & Film section
pebbens ( talk) 22:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
What about that Simpsons episode where Lizzie was in some kind of jury? Should that be added? Seriously, I saw the 2004 Discovery Channel documentary on the Borden murders recently, and they mentioned a third theory, that was supposedly brought up in court. The theory was refuted by the forensics, but it held that an unknown man was allowed into the home by Abby Borden to meet with Andrew Borden. Killed Andrew, then went upstairs and killed Abby. The timing is apparently way off, and that's why it was refuted, but apparently it was what convinced jurors of Lizzie's innocence (according to the documentary). I don't know if any of this has any bearing in reality, as some of the documentary did seem a tad sensational, but does anyone have access to the court testimony/news of the time that refutes or explains this? At the very least, if not brought up under Other theories, it could be mentioned next to the documentary (it was not their conclusion, however).-- Tim Thomason 20:33, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Per the inquest transcript on the University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Law:
Borden was not born Lizbeth Andrew Borden or Elizabeth Andrew Borden. She may have put the name Lizbeth on her headstone, but it was not her birth name. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 01:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
It seems rather obvious, by mentioning her marital state in the first sentence, that maybe her lack of a husband was part of the reason why she would terminate her parents, or that seems to be the motivation of this pedia. This sentence should probably remove the reference to her marital state from the first sentence, and introduce it in a later paragraph. I think the fact that she wasn't married had very little to do with the murders or who she wanted to be in life. As a rich woman, she could have any lover she wanted, so why settle for some conventional life. K5okc ( talk) 05:53, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
And still, it is how she was widely referred in publications from the period and now. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 02:40, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
You know, I really don't want to argue with you, and your assertion of it either being ignorance or on purpose is far from being civil. Please stop trying to stick in the last word here, you don't get any Wikipedia points for having the last word. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 12:07, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
In any case, during the 19th century "spinster" was a kind of a technical legal term, meaning woman who had never been married. All women were either spinsters, wives, widows, or (much more rarely) divorcées. AnonMoos ( talk) 14:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Because you don't like (or maybe understand) the word spinster here does not mean the article needs your own special touch. I thought you were done posting, but apparently you have a thing about having the last word. Hoo-yah. Go for it. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 07:44, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
An editor added the book Lizzie Borden: Girl Detective and referenced it to an amazon sales page for the book, which spams the sales site by its inclusion. The description given is "a 2010 novel by Richard Behrens in which a young Lizzie Borden takes up a role as a consulting detective in Fall River in the 1870s and solves crimes. The novel is a fanciful mixture of fact and fiction but contains researched insights into Fall River history, the 1870s and the Borden's role in their community." Running a Google search yields all of 15 entries for this book, some of which are blogs, which in no way establishes notability for the book. This is clearly a book based on a plot of non-historical fiction a la Nancy Drew and does not given historical information regarding the real Lizzie Borden or her life as a young girl. Lizzie was not a junior G-man or girl detective. Now let's examine the hidden note on this page: "DO NOT add trivia section or listings of instances where Borden is mentioned in songs, films or other media. This is covered sufficiently in the "Borden and culture" section and is not intended to be an exhaustive list. If you have items you think may be appropriate, bring it up on the talk page. Any additions not previously discussed WILL BE REMOVED and may be reported as vandalism. Thank you." At no time was the subject of this addition brought to this page for discussion nor was a consensus garnered for the appropriateness of inclusion of this book. Despite the fact that the book is set in Fall River, Massachusetts, historically that is all it is. That is sort of like saying The Usual Suspects is partially set in or about Los Angeles and therefore it is historically accurate. The tagline for this book is "The Adventures of New England's Most Excellent Girl Detective". Nope, the only thing this book does is use the name of Lizzie Borden as a basis for the plot, which is not about Lizzie Borden's real life or existence. Of course, all of the Borden media section could be removed, but I would argue strenuously for the inclusion of the theater, film and television depictions of the actual historical murders. I removed all other media mentions besides books and the theater, film and television depictions of the actual murders or productions set in the area of the murders that use the actual murders and events surrounding them. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 07:46, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
If you are going to eliminate fiction from the list, then you must also take down Spiering, Hunter, Brown and Radin. These are fictional suppositions, not historically accurate.
Hunter puts forth the fictional theory about a lesbian relationship between Lizzie and Bridget and has the murder of Abby occur with a candlestick. In an interview I did with Mr. McBain, he calls the book fiction. See http://www.edmcbain.com/Newsdesk.asp?id=451 which appears on McBain's website.
Spiering was just a master showman who made stuff up in his book. He started rumors about Lizzie which persist to this very day.
Brown has NO proof, or sources, for his illegitimate Billy Borden story and has admitted that he has no proof for his theory. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjPheZblQL4
In regards to PearTree Press being one step away from a vanity press, you are mistaken. I did not add the book to the Lizzie Borden page, but whoever did, did so in context with the other listings. Perhaps we can add a Fiction section to the literature.
I am not a vanity press. I am an indy publisher who has 8 years experience in publishing magazines, both historical and literary, plus several prominent books on the Borden case. I think that instead of slamming this new book, you might consider reading it. It is new, therefore not prominently appearing on Google as of yet. It is soon to be reviewed by major publications and will receive the endorsements of some rather renowned writers. You seem a bit shortsighted in your elimination of this title and your out of hand slamming of my business.
Skoorey ( talk) 15:27, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
May I ask you why Wikipedia has entire pages of self-serving information. The Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter for instance? That is to sell a book and later a film. How is that book allowed by Wikipedia standards to have a page, and other books as well, when this book is not deemed allowable.
I am the publisher, but I did not add the book to Wikipedia. It was added by someone else. I was not promoting it here. However, since you deem it "self-serving" then I thought I should respond.
I guess I do not understand why some things are deemed "self-serving" and removed, while others are not. Can you explain this please?
Skoorey ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC).
The Nance O'Neil section states: "The book Lizzie by Evan Hunter posed the theory that Lizzie Borden had an affair with the actress Nance O'Neil, whom she met in Boston in 1904." I have the book right in front of me and I don't see anywhere that Hunter claims that Lizzie and Nance had an affair. He mentions her only once in the non-fictional afterwards and refers to their relationship only as a "midnight entertainment." I believe it was Frank Spiering in his book Lizzie that speculates about a lesbian affair with Nance, not Hunter. Hunter's novel has a lot of accurate fact in regard to the inquest and the trial, but the rest of the book is more of an entertaining fiction than anything that can be called "theory." Should this section be modified to reflect this? Bookofthoth ( talk) 05:11, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
What are the facts? Was Lizzy Borden a homosexual? What is the proof? That's all that needs to be in there. If there is a historical rumour that Lizzy Borden was a homosexual, then that and her lover just needs to be in one sentence. I propose something on the order of "Lizzie Borden was thought to have a homosexual relationship from 1903 to 1906 with Nance O'Neill. They both took their secret to the grave. K5okc ( talk) 19:55, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
In all this talk, everyone is ignoring my original post. The Evan Hunter book does not give any theory of Lizzie being involved with Nance O'Neil. That theory was most prominent in a non-fiction book called Lizzie by Frank Spiering. The Evan Hunter novel is a work of fantasy, based on no historical evidence other than the author's imagination. It is a fiction novel about Lizzie being a lesbian. Again, not based on anything historical. The whole issue of whether Lizzie was actually homosexual or not was not in the scope of my comment. Thanks. Bookofthoth ( talk) 03:18, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Murders, the first section after the brief introduction, states: "That day, Andrew Borden had gone into town to do his usual rounds at the bank and post office. He returned home at about 10:45 a.m. About a half-hour later, Lizzie Borden found his body. According to Sullivan's testimony, she was lying down in her room on the third floor of the house shortly after 11:00 a.m...."
It is not until the Conjecture section that any identification as to who Sullivan might be is offered. ("One theory is that the maid, Bridget Sullivan") If that is indeed the Sullivan cited at the beginning of the article, then may I suggest writing:
According the the testimony of Bridget Sullivan, a maid employed by the Borden household, she was lying down...
or some other alteration that identifies who gave testimony.
Personally, I think it would be less confusing overall if a small squib was inserted right after the introduction identifying the principle people involved, but at the very least listing who was living in the house at the time of the murders, to wit:
Andrew Borden, a prosperous (merchant? businessman? farmer? entrepreneur? what was he?)
Mrs. ??? Borden, Andrew Borden's second wife
Lizzie Borden, Andrew Borden's elder daughter, a spinster
Emma Borden, Andrew Borden's younger daughter (was she also a spinster? how old was she?)
servant #1 (Bridget Sullivan?)
servant #2 (if any?)
and perhaps
Sarah Borden, deceased (what year?), Andrew Borden's first wife and mother to Lizzie and Emma
John Morse, Sarah Borden's brother
Would such additions be helpful to anyone else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mutzwerg ( talk • contribs) 22:01, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
SPINSTER???? What is this, 1894? Are you still calling black people negroes? Please remove. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Susan.dicey.k ( talk • contribs) 05:02, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I was shocked at how bad this article is. This is not a B rated article. I cleaned-up some of the sentences, but this needs enough work for 10 people. Stefan 72.56.50.76 ( talk) 13:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
The listings there are not referenced at all except for one of them. If this section doesn't get referrenced I suggest it all be deleted. It's a section that is being used for all kinds of trivial claims such as the Simpsons again which do not belong in this article at all. I will be going there and removing those kinds of comments out of the article after this edit. Thoughts on this since we are not to have things in articles that go unreferenced I think this needs to be taken care of. I haven't been on much so I was really surprised to see this addition added again. Thanks, -- CrohnieGal Talk 12:08, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Noticed Warehouse 13 gave this, a bit more "calculated", version of the rhyme:
Lizzie Borden took an ax And gave her father forty whacks. When the job was neatly done She gave her mother forty-one.
First of. Should not axe be ax, as this is US English?
From the article I am not able to tell whether they concluded on who was murdered first. This rhyme conclude the father, which would seem the most logical in the sense that the step mother was (asleep?) in her room. Was this ever specified? Are there any sources on what was the original. Which one is most used? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Essexesd ( talk • contribs) 01:40, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Toward the end of the trial section of the article it is noted that the step mother died first. I think the rhyme is sequenced the way it is simply because of the number of "whacks" and not for accuracy. True Crime Reader ( talk) 01:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't see how excluding the rhyme can be justified. It's part of the folklore behind Borden and many people knew the rhyme before they knew the story behind it. If you leave it out it will be like ignoring the giant elephant in the room. True Crime Reader ( talk) 16:25, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
There is not nearly enough information here on the actual murders, the motive, her life before the murders, etc. This article assumes that you already know the basics of the murders rather than explaining the murders themselves or even why people believe that Lizzy Borden killed her parents. -- Kleio08 23:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Ya, this article makes no sense. It's like doing an article on Coke that consists soley of the drink's taste. Where's the rest of it?
As in, can we get one of her here? Maxxo 01:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
As at this date there is no photo of her ? Pray, tell why not or I'm libel to start swinging something ! -- Free4It 23:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
In popular memory Lizzie Borden is widely recalled as being a teenager or even younger at the time of the murder, but, in fact, she was a grown woman in her late thirties.
How did this change in popular perception become established? Does anyone know of a song, play, movie, TV show, or other widely viewed work that might have given rise to this misconception?
I've also heard the nursery rhyme with the words "mother" and "father" switched -- indeed, the song at the end of this article uses that order. Was forensics advanced enough at the time for people to determine who was actually murdered first? Or, do we just not know? If not, perhaps a little note should be added and the words in the nursery rhyme switched in order to be aligned with the song.
I would seriously question this article's assertion that the Borden case is remembered chiefly because of the nursery rhyme. There's a whole cottage industry devoted to studying the case and speculating about what happened, and this has been going on practically since the day Lizzie was acquitted. I think the case would be famous with or without the rhyme. In fact, if anything I would say that books and programmes about the case are responsible for keeping the rhyme in modern memory (I sure never heard it on the playground). Perodicticus 16:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Does the author have an obsession for the rhyme? It's mentioned in 3 separate places. Since it's a blaitant declaration of Lizzy's guilt, without excuse, it's pretty much the same thing as O. J. Simpson's entry saying "but every one Knows he did it" every paragraph. This is hardly NPOV. I never heard it as a kid, just from reading books saying it's famous. It seems to me like it's become a situation like "Brontosaurus", which would hardly survive if people didn't keep on mentioning it's obsolete. CFLeon 00:53, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Is a loaded word like "spinster" the best we can do? According to Wikipedia's own definition, the word is value-laden pejorative - at least to some extent.
What's wrong with "unmarried?"
Seriously ... spinster?
172.130.14.32 18:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
More Stephen Colbert inspired vandalism likely; see Talk:Latchkey kid. NawlinWiki 04:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I got denied protection as "nothing has happened recently". USADude 22:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC) Update: USADude 12:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I added info about the book Lizzie written by Evan Hunter where he gives his own unique theory on who killed the Bordens. He also hosts (as Ed McBain) a video where the various historians give their own reasons who they suspect who the killer(s) were.I happened to see the video on TV (Mystery channel) recently and rather enjoyed it. Have not read Hunter's book Lizzie. L.J. Brooks 16:30 04 Sep 2006 (UTC)
...of wikilinking the standalone publication years in ISBN book references? Or the standalone years under "Artistic depictions"? Nobody's going to be clicking on 1991 to see if anything else happened that year. It's just visual clutter. It wouldn't hurt any of us to (re)read Edward Tufte, that sworn enemy of "useless, non-informative, or information-obscuring elements of information displays". -- CliffC 16:48, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
I added a {{ Fact}} tag to the section "Alleged lesbian affair with actress Nance O'Neil". Borden's sexuality gets more wiki-ink than the murders, and all I see is conjecture. The corresponding section in the Nance O'Neil article says "O'Neil's actual sexuality remains unclear." Google tells me that Borden is the only person in Wikipedia to have had an "alleged lesbian affair"; this seems like a poor choice of words without a WP:RS. -- CliffC 06:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I have to complain about Tualha's recent edits to the Lizzie Borden page. The photos are incorrect, and not Emma or Lizzie. I have changed the page back to its correct factual and photographic settings. I am a Lizzie Borden scholar, editor of The Hatchet: Journal of LIzzie Borden Studies, moderator of The Lizzie Borden Society Forum, webmaster of LizzieAndrewBorden.com, and blogger of MondoLizzie.com. I know of which I speak. Please do not continue to post false facts and images on this page. Dr. Stefani Koorey
How can you say what you do and still put up factually INACCURATE information on Lizzie Borden. You continue to revert to your version with photos that are not Lizzie, are not Emma, and with false information on the murders, the woman's life, and her social world. You are saying to me that you have SOURCES for these false statements and these photos? You have proof that what you put up is more accurate than what I have crafted?
I appreciate the lesson in references, but your continued reversion from my edit back to yours is not acceptable when your edit is incorrect.
Wikipedia is fast losing its reputation because of bouncers like you who guard the gates of an historical person such as Lizzie Borden. You know not of which you write, even though you talk a very big game about sources.
I suggest you rethink your position and check your own sources to confirm what I have been saying.
My next edit will conform to your requirements, with footnotes. If you dare to change it back to your mistake-ridden version, I will be forced to abandon all hope that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and forced to publicize it as a place for amateur historians to rule the pages of a once well-conceived web resource.
I accept that she's a pop culture icon but that doesnt' mean we need to list every unsourced passing reference. Exhibit A:
So what if the cat does? and can you prove it? I suggest interested editors cut all the loosely-associated trivia from those lists and post it here to the Talk page in case there's a nugget of notable use that someone can save. Canuckle 15:26, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
That seems like an odd way to describe someone in their lead. Do we identify Isaac Newton as an "English physicist and bachelor?" -- Aquillion 08:03, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
The lesbian section doesn't supply references. The single reference in the paragraph (straight dope) is a reference source for the sexuality of Nance O'Neil. The reference also states that Lizzie Borden being a lesbian is a matter of pure conjecture.
The reference states that 'The belief that Lizzie Borden was a lesbian basically comes down to the assumption that any woman not married by thirty must be gay.' The article was quite interesting, especially after I read the references, but was misleading on the lesbian issue (with respect to the quoted source.)
Rhodescus 01:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
"Lizzie" is short for "Elizabeth". Is her full, proper name "Elizabeth Andrew Borden"? Well, according to this website, it is. -- MosheA 21:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I've started working through the article and looking at some of the references that are in it. I hope I don't step on anyone's toes as I'm working on it. I've just got some problems with the text from where most of the citations come - Straight Dope Staff Report. Part of my problem is that at the bottom of the reference page, it says "Staff Reports are researched and written by members of the Straight Dope Science Advisory Board, Cecil's online auxiliary. Although the SDSAB does its best, these articles are edited by Ed Zotti, not Cecil, so accuracywise you'd better keep your fingers crossed." Then in the first few paragraphs, there is a major error in fact. It says that John Morse was Abby's brother, when all the actual documents from the time - inquest and trial transcripts - are clear that he was the first Mrs. Borden's brother. The other problem is that the page reads more like an essay and isn't hard on sources. In any event, I'm working on it and hope what I do meets with everyone's approval. Wildhartlivie 02:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
The band The Dresden Dolls has a song from their demo album A is for Accident about Lizzie entitled Thirty Whacks. I know a long, long list of references in music is not wanted in this article, however this song seems to be more relevant because, unlike other songs on the list, it does not merely reference Lizzie, but it supposed to be told from her POV.
Add or no?
Matt ( talk) 17:14, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
"The house is an exact replica of the Borden's house and guests actually sleep in the room Mrs. Borden was murdered in. According to local legend, not one person has made it through the night in that room. The house also has a huge attraction not only because of the Bed and Breakfast but it is believed that the house may be haunted by the ghosts of the Borden family for odd things have been known to happen in that house when whenever anyone insults the family."
Kostaki mou ( talk) 22:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Earlier today, User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) added a quote to an already existing citation from the New York Times archives regarding the purchase of prussic acid. This quote only functioned to echo what was being cited. There is nothing controversial about the inclusion of Lizzie Borden's effort to buy prussic acid. This fact is present in each and every book that has been published about this case and in all the ones listed in "Further reading", it is present on the website at the University of Missouri, Kansas City, which has Borden's inquest testimony available online, it is present at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, which has copies of all the original source documents, it is present at the LizzieAndrewBorden.com website, which is a research site investigating the case, it is present at the Crime Library, it is present on LizzieBorden.org, which is a Fall River Historical Society site. There is little, if any, chance that this piece of information will be lost if it isn't copied and pasted here. Because of this presence in every other source for this case, there is no necessity to "preserve in situ" (although copy and pasting it in a quote function on Wikipedia is not in situ preservation) the New York Times headline and/or opening paragraph, which is all that is allowable per WP guidelines due to the necessity of purchasing the article to read it further. No one has challenged the veracity of the inclusion of prussic acid, and it was already cited. I have removed this useless copy and paste quote for the reasons of redundancy, lack of necessity and that it added nothing new to the article. We thank User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) for the birthdate of Andrew Borden, but we do not need the useless quote for this prussic acid purchase attempt fact. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 01:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
The New York Times citation for the will is not acceptable. It still leads to a full page requiring membership or payment. The second source for the will is a self-published blog, which is in violation of WP:SPS. As for Borden's name, please note the discussion above at Full Name. Borden may have adapted the name Lizbeth as an affectation, but that is not her name, as she swore at her inquest. The blog citation isn't acceptable as a source for the name. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 05:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I am opening this request for comments because attempts at discussion with the other editor, User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), as noted in the above sections, has not been productive. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 09:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
To summarize the opinions offered for this issue, six individuals, myself ( Wildhartlivie), RedSpruce, AndToToToo, Kostaki mou, Pinkadelica, and Rossrs all agree that while it is valid and proper to mention the adapted name in the article, it does not belong in the lead as an assertion that it is a legal name. One individual, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) believes it belongs in the lead, and one individual, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles said it belonged in the article somewhere, but did not designate an opinion as to where. Consensus regarding this issue supports removing the mention from the lead, but leaving it later in the article. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 22:06, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) I'm a lot puzzled by changes Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) made today. When a request for comments has been opened due to a given issue, and consensus is beginning to form against the position a person takes, it would seem to me that if a compromise was reached, by definition of the word, it would first have to be reached. Instead, the editor actually trimmed the small portion of the complete abstract insertion that wasn't already covered by material in the article for which the citation was being given (ie, "for whose murder and that of her stepmother, Mrs. Abby Borden, she was tried and acquitted nearly thirty-five years ago.") and used the summary "trim quote for compromise." Since compromise means a mutual acceptance of terms, there was no compromise on this. If you want to offer a compromise, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), then offer one for discussion. Changing it slightly doesn't abate the issue. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 21:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
To summarize the opinions offered for this issue, three individuals, myself ( Wildhartlivie), John Broughton and Pinkadelica agree that the use of the quotation as it exists in this particular instance is not needed, is inappropriate, violates earlier established consensus regarding the inappropriateness of the use of quotes, as is being practiced here, and further is now being considered a violation of "fair use" by the Associated Press. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) believes this type of usage is appropriate since the parameter is present in citation templates and Biophys agrees with him. Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles offered comment which did not address the issue. Consensus, and potential prevailing legality issues, is that the inclusion of quotations used in the manner as it is in this article is not appropriate and violates fair use. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 22:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
To summarize the opinions offered for this issue: Myself ( Wildhartlivie) and AndToToToo agreed that the article, as is observed in the image currently being offered as the reference source, is titled "Prussic Acid In The Case" with the other clauses functioning as subtitles, which should not be presented as the article title. Also, the format presented in the archive is not representative of the title as it is presented in the actual article in the image. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) offered his interpretation that the entire group of clauses is the article title. Consensus is that the title is "Prussic Acid In The Case." Wildhartlivie ( talk) 22:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I am broaching these issues for input from the Wikipedia community to clarify these issues per a consensus. Thanks. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 08:35, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
To summarize opinions offered about this issue: Myself ( Wildhartlivie) and AndToToToo agreed that the change of citation from the original newspaper source to a clipped image of the same article was unnecessary. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) stands by his change. Pinkadelica and Rossrs saw no difference in the citations. Consensus was not reached on the disposition of this issue, thus the change will stand. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 23:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Would it be considered appropriate to add a section for other theories, such as Arnold Brown's view that the murders were committed by Lizzie Borden's illegitimate half-brother? PatrickLMT ( talk) 18:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I removed the the word "spinster" from the opening paragraph as even wiki's page on it says it's an insult. Just seemed inappropriate. 68.166.172.84 ( talk) 00:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I disagree with the reasoning for keeping spinster in the opening sentence, and the opinion of Wildhartlivie hardly consistutes a "consensus". It is considered an insulting term. Applying this reasoning, does that make it OK to refer to afro-americans using terms that are no longer acceptable (the n word), were during their lifetime? 165.189.169.190 ( talk) 15:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
What's about Lizzies childhood ? Her mother died at the age of 39 or 40. Lizzie was three years old.
The childhood possible give informations about Lizzies charakter. -- AndreaMimi ( talk) 11:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Well, well I'll look at this paragraphe and read them exactly. I thank you for yor answer and wish you a nice weekend.
"character" - yes, I know. But my A-Level is to long ago and my english not perfect. -- AndreaMimi ( talk) 09:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Would anyone object to Minette Walters' "The Sculptress" being included under the prose fiction header? http://www.ciao.co.uk/The_Sculptress_Minette_Walters__Review_5438087 62.113.159.156 ( talk) 12:17, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Request the addition of the play 40 Whacks currently running at the Annoyance Theater in Chicago, IL. The Annoyance is a well known in the fringe theater circuit, as well as having such well known shows as "Coed Prison Sluts" and "Splatter Theatre", the show is has recieved rave reviews from the Chicago press. Not allowing the addition of 40 Whacks is a great disservice to those interested in the fringe theater movement.
- Request the addition of the play 40 Whacks currently running at the Annoyance Theater in Chicago, IL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.251.58 ( talk) 05:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Regarding 40 Whacks at the Annoyance theater, it is highly recommended by the Chicago Reader: http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/40-whacks/Event?oid=1888046 by New City: http://newcitystage.com/2010/06/21/review-40-whacksannoyance-theatre/ by the Chicago Theater Blog, Chicago Stage Review and an article on the creators was published here: http://chicago.metromix.com/theater/article/killer-comedy/1980507/content
- I'd like to request the addition of the new play 40 Whacks opening at the Annoyance Theater ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annoyance_Theatre) on June 18th as part of the Just for Laughs Festival. Show info from the JFL page: http://www.justforlaughschicago.com/justforlaughschicago/stories/story/0,,218860,00.html
Would anyone object to the addition of Word for Word's 2003 production of Angela Carter's "The Fall River Axe Murders"? Information can be found on-line here: http://www.zspace.org/press.htm -- JLSQ ( talk) 00:42, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry I wasn't clear. My intention was to ask if the addition of Word for Word's performance be added, not the article whose link I included. The link was to provide information that might help with the decision making process. -- JLSQ ( talk) 05:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I was just wondering whether a reference to the Series 2 Living Dead Doll of Lizzie Borden should be included in the cultural references section. (Mezco Toyz also made a headknocker figure and later, in 2004, a miniaturised version of the Lizzie Borden doll). The doll's hairstyle and costume were clearly based on photographs of Lizzie Borden, and came with a death certificate bearing Borden's real life death date and the traditional "Lizzie Borden took an axe" rhyme.
If it would be appropriate to be included, it seems to require a new header under the references section for "Other" as it doesn't fit under the other media sub-headings. Thanks for your thoughts.
Mabalu ( talk) 13:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
The concern is whether the line removed [6] here should be included or not. It has been removed and readded more than once. 130.101.100.107 ( talk) 14:03, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
It establishes that Correira couldn't have committed the murder. It establishes that Correira's murder helped establish doubt. The article doesn't contend that this is the reason, or the sole reason, that Borden was acquitted. What do you propose that the addition that the jury didn't know this adds to that? The article actually outlines that reasonable doubt already existed for the acquittal:
If the contention is that the reason Borden was acquitted was due to the Correira murder, the phrase you want to add would be more relevant. The article only states that the existence of another murderer helped solidify reasonable doubt. It doesn't need additional reinforcement to prove Correira did not do it, it already establishes that. I can't see that the phrase adds anything. LaVidaLoca ( talk) 15:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
In the "Television and Film" of the "Borden and Culture" section; Borden should be mentioned for her appearance on the jury of a mock trial of Homer Simpson in The Simpsons Treehouse of Horror IV, episode 1F04. This is of note as The Simpsons are arguably one of the greatest pop culture icons of the late 20th / early 21st century. Gabe0463 ( talk) 18:11, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Someone replaced an authentic photo of Lizzie with a picture of someone else. (Even if this were Lizzie, the date (c. 1889) would certainly be wrong. Lizzie was 29 that year. This woman is obviously far too young.) Kostaki mou ( talk) 02:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone have a credible reference for the fact that the hatch and Lizzie Borden's fathers skull was found in the attic of Lizzie Borden's attorney's house (by his daughter) around the 1960s - it was on history's lost and found http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwXAIKMLPvI —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.20.104.221 ( talk) 06:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
The correct answer to all of this is that the "skulls" displayed at the trial, and which could have remained in the possession of Lizzie's Lawyers and been displayed elsewhere afterward, were plaster casts, not the genuine articles. After the autopsies the heads of the 2 corpses were detatched, boiled, and the skin removed, then the casts were taken and the skulls buried in the appropriate graves, though above the original caskets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ClarkSavageJr ( talk • contribs) 15:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Where can I find any information or Lizzy Borden Uncle John..... And did anyone investigated him whatsoever........... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.136.226.192 ( talk) 20:42, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone object to adding Avram Davidson's short story "The Deed of the Deft-Footed Dragon", which is entirely about Lizzie, and offers a novel (if unprovable) theory?
(The Chinese laundryman did it; he was a killer for a tong, relocated to get him away from rival tongs and the cops; Lizzie had helped his daughter in his charitable work, and he overheard her step-mother's plans to cheat her.) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:22, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
The 1976 BBC series “Second Verdict” looked at the case, with a dramatised reconstruction of some events. This series was unusual, in that it took the format of a discussion between two (fictional) detectives from the “Softly Softly” police series - Det. Chief Supt. Charlie Barlow, played by Stratford Johns, and Det. Chief Supt. John Watt, played by Frank Windsor - looking at the evidence of six cases where a verdict had either not been reached, or was controversial. Rosemary Leach played Lizzie. Sadly, Barlow and Watt reached a “verdict” in only one case (and not this one!) leading to Johns lamenting that they should have called the programme “Second Opinion”. The Wikipedia article on the series is here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Verdict. Jock123 ( talk) 20:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
I think this whole section needs to be removed. It doesn't add any references, maybe one, not sure, but surely this section is trivia that isn't needed in an encyclopedia. Thoughts? -- CrohnieGal Talk 10:46, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
During the inquest and the trial the accused was asked if she owns a seal skin sack. This word is not common today, and not many will wear any seal skin product. Minus the fact that there are no longer quality seal furs to be had. The reader here is told it was a cloak under "Motive and Methods." The proper word, regardless of the sites insistance on "cloak" is a "Seal Skin Sacque." The brutal Americanization of the word sacque to sack is what probably makes this wiki article incomplete. Miss Borden told the inquest that she would not put acid on any seal skin. These items were only bought by wealthy people and treated like diamonds. The inquisitor and the recorder wrote the word "sack" but she was cultered enough to know they were trying to say sacque. She went on to state that she didn't even know where the drug store was, and never went there in her life. Obviously this was not checked, as the evidence was not material to the crime, although it could show she was a liar. In any case, a sacque (sack) is more like a jacket. It has hooks on the front instead of buttons, and the garment is normally kept short to the waist to enhance a womans figure. The otherwise juvenile translation of a sacque to a cloak is like calling a diamond a rock. 99.202.144.103 ( talk) 20:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I have added this play to the theater section as it is, by far, the most notable depiction of the Lizzy Borden character to date, and the section was lacking, given that it mentions numerous obscure productions, but was missing it's most notable.( 75.69.241.91 ( talk) 04:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC))
Obviously, the character is based on Lizzie Borden, and of course the character is not named 'Lizzie Borden'. Your argument is akin to stating that Charlie Chaplin's character in The Great Dictator is not Adolph Hitler, which is true technically. Hart and Kaufman both stated that the character was based on Borden. It remains the best known depiction, fictionalized or not,in a play (not a television movie from the 1970s, which has nothing to do with anything, and which you could also argue was fictionalized!) and that stands true to this very day. To not include 'The Man Who Came to Dinner' in the theater section is absolutely absurd. In the interest of fictionalizing the story somewhat, Fall River, Massachusetts was changed to Gloucester, Massachusetts and "Lizzie Borden took an axe" became "Harriet Sedley took an axe". I'd be willing to note that the character is a fictionalized character based on Borden, and not a direct depiction, but it still stands as factual that Lizzie Borden was the inspiration for Harriet Sedley.
If your argument was that it may not be the "most notable", that still would not justify your deletion of it. The proper protocol would have been to request a citation instead of unilaterally deleting an item. And while we are on that, I'm quite sure a play that was a Broadway success in 1939, has had numerous television adaptations, a major motion picture, and has had numerous revivals on Broadway, including one with Nathan Lane in 2000, and has been released on DVD, and shown repeatedly on cable television is easily more notable than the other, frankly obscure, plays mentioned in the section.
As for the reference to the Elizabeth Montgomery television movie, that TV movie has no relevance to what we are discussing.
Are you seriously arguing that those hardly known plays are more notable than a Hart/Kaufman classic that is performed to this day??
And are you really stating that Harriet Sedley is NOT based on Lizzie Borden, and merits no inclusion in the Theater section??
Biographical entries in Wikipedia regularly note when the biographical subjects have been used as clear inspiration for fictionalized characters. 75.69.241.91 ( talk) 03:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC))
Television & Film section
pebbens ( talk) 22:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
What about that Simpsons episode where Lizzie was in some kind of jury? Should that be added? Seriously, I saw the 2004 Discovery Channel documentary on the Borden murders recently, and they mentioned a third theory, that was supposedly brought up in court. The theory was refuted by the forensics, but it held that an unknown man was allowed into the home by Abby Borden to meet with Andrew Borden. Killed Andrew, then went upstairs and killed Abby. The timing is apparently way off, and that's why it was refuted, but apparently it was what convinced jurors of Lizzie's innocence (according to the documentary). I don't know if any of this has any bearing in reality, as some of the documentary did seem a tad sensational, but does anyone have access to the court testimony/news of the time that refutes or explains this? At the very least, if not brought up under Other theories, it could be mentioned next to the documentary (it was not their conclusion, however).-- Tim Thomason 20:33, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Per the inquest transcript on the University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Law:
Borden was not born Lizbeth Andrew Borden or Elizabeth Andrew Borden. She may have put the name Lizbeth on her headstone, but it was not her birth name. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 01:27, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
It seems rather obvious, by mentioning her marital state in the first sentence, that maybe her lack of a husband was part of the reason why she would terminate her parents, or that seems to be the motivation of this pedia. This sentence should probably remove the reference to her marital state from the first sentence, and introduce it in a later paragraph. I think the fact that she wasn't married had very little to do with the murders or who she wanted to be in life. As a rich woman, she could have any lover she wanted, so why settle for some conventional life. K5okc ( talk) 05:53, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
And still, it is how she was widely referred in publications from the period and now. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 02:40, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
You know, I really don't want to argue with you, and your assertion of it either being ignorance or on purpose is far from being civil. Please stop trying to stick in the last word here, you don't get any Wikipedia points for having the last word. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 12:07, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
In any case, during the 19th century "spinster" was a kind of a technical legal term, meaning woman who had never been married. All women were either spinsters, wives, widows, or (much more rarely) divorcées. AnonMoos ( talk) 14:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Because you don't like (or maybe understand) the word spinster here does not mean the article needs your own special touch. I thought you were done posting, but apparently you have a thing about having the last word. Hoo-yah. Go for it. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 07:44, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
An editor added the book Lizzie Borden: Girl Detective and referenced it to an amazon sales page for the book, which spams the sales site by its inclusion. The description given is "a 2010 novel by Richard Behrens in which a young Lizzie Borden takes up a role as a consulting detective in Fall River in the 1870s and solves crimes. The novel is a fanciful mixture of fact and fiction but contains researched insights into Fall River history, the 1870s and the Borden's role in their community." Running a Google search yields all of 15 entries for this book, some of which are blogs, which in no way establishes notability for the book. This is clearly a book based on a plot of non-historical fiction a la Nancy Drew and does not given historical information regarding the real Lizzie Borden or her life as a young girl. Lizzie was not a junior G-man or girl detective. Now let's examine the hidden note on this page: "DO NOT add trivia section or listings of instances where Borden is mentioned in songs, films or other media. This is covered sufficiently in the "Borden and culture" section and is not intended to be an exhaustive list. If you have items you think may be appropriate, bring it up on the talk page. Any additions not previously discussed WILL BE REMOVED and may be reported as vandalism. Thank you." At no time was the subject of this addition brought to this page for discussion nor was a consensus garnered for the appropriateness of inclusion of this book. Despite the fact that the book is set in Fall River, Massachusetts, historically that is all it is. That is sort of like saying The Usual Suspects is partially set in or about Los Angeles and therefore it is historically accurate. The tagline for this book is "The Adventures of New England's Most Excellent Girl Detective". Nope, the only thing this book does is use the name of Lizzie Borden as a basis for the plot, which is not about Lizzie Borden's real life or existence. Of course, all of the Borden media section could be removed, but I would argue strenuously for the inclusion of the theater, film and television depictions of the actual historical murders. I removed all other media mentions besides books and the theater, film and television depictions of the actual murders or productions set in the area of the murders that use the actual murders and events surrounding them. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 07:46, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
If you are going to eliminate fiction from the list, then you must also take down Spiering, Hunter, Brown and Radin. These are fictional suppositions, not historically accurate.
Hunter puts forth the fictional theory about a lesbian relationship between Lizzie and Bridget and has the murder of Abby occur with a candlestick. In an interview I did with Mr. McBain, he calls the book fiction. See http://www.edmcbain.com/Newsdesk.asp?id=451 which appears on McBain's website.
Spiering was just a master showman who made stuff up in his book. He started rumors about Lizzie which persist to this very day.
Brown has NO proof, or sources, for his illegitimate Billy Borden story and has admitted that he has no proof for his theory. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjPheZblQL4
In regards to PearTree Press being one step away from a vanity press, you are mistaken. I did not add the book to the Lizzie Borden page, but whoever did, did so in context with the other listings. Perhaps we can add a Fiction section to the literature.
I am not a vanity press. I am an indy publisher who has 8 years experience in publishing magazines, both historical and literary, plus several prominent books on the Borden case. I think that instead of slamming this new book, you might consider reading it. It is new, therefore not prominently appearing on Google as of yet. It is soon to be reviewed by major publications and will receive the endorsements of some rather renowned writers. You seem a bit shortsighted in your elimination of this title and your out of hand slamming of my business.
Skoorey ( talk) 15:27, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
May I ask you why Wikipedia has entire pages of self-serving information. The Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter for instance? That is to sell a book and later a film. How is that book allowed by Wikipedia standards to have a page, and other books as well, when this book is not deemed allowable.
I am the publisher, but I did not add the book to Wikipedia. It was added by someone else. I was not promoting it here. However, since you deem it "self-serving" then I thought I should respond.
I guess I do not understand why some things are deemed "self-serving" and removed, while others are not. Can you explain this please?
Skoorey ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC).
The Nance O'Neil section states: "The book Lizzie by Evan Hunter posed the theory that Lizzie Borden had an affair with the actress Nance O'Neil, whom she met in Boston in 1904." I have the book right in front of me and I don't see anywhere that Hunter claims that Lizzie and Nance had an affair. He mentions her only once in the non-fictional afterwards and refers to their relationship only as a "midnight entertainment." I believe it was Frank Spiering in his book Lizzie that speculates about a lesbian affair with Nance, not Hunter. Hunter's novel has a lot of accurate fact in regard to the inquest and the trial, but the rest of the book is more of an entertaining fiction than anything that can be called "theory." Should this section be modified to reflect this? Bookofthoth ( talk) 05:11, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
What are the facts? Was Lizzy Borden a homosexual? What is the proof? That's all that needs to be in there. If there is a historical rumour that Lizzy Borden was a homosexual, then that and her lover just needs to be in one sentence. I propose something on the order of "Lizzie Borden was thought to have a homosexual relationship from 1903 to 1906 with Nance O'Neill. They both took their secret to the grave. K5okc ( talk) 19:55, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
In all this talk, everyone is ignoring my original post. The Evan Hunter book does not give any theory of Lizzie being involved with Nance O'Neil. That theory was most prominent in a non-fiction book called Lizzie by Frank Spiering. The Evan Hunter novel is a work of fantasy, based on no historical evidence other than the author's imagination. It is a fiction novel about Lizzie being a lesbian. Again, not based on anything historical. The whole issue of whether Lizzie was actually homosexual or not was not in the scope of my comment. Thanks. Bookofthoth ( talk) 03:18, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Murders, the first section after the brief introduction, states: "That day, Andrew Borden had gone into town to do his usual rounds at the bank and post office. He returned home at about 10:45 a.m. About a half-hour later, Lizzie Borden found his body. According to Sullivan's testimony, she was lying down in her room on the third floor of the house shortly after 11:00 a.m...."
It is not until the Conjecture section that any identification as to who Sullivan might be is offered. ("One theory is that the maid, Bridget Sullivan") If that is indeed the Sullivan cited at the beginning of the article, then may I suggest writing:
According the the testimony of Bridget Sullivan, a maid employed by the Borden household, she was lying down...
or some other alteration that identifies who gave testimony.
Personally, I think it would be less confusing overall if a small squib was inserted right after the introduction identifying the principle people involved, but at the very least listing who was living in the house at the time of the murders, to wit:
Andrew Borden, a prosperous (merchant? businessman? farmer? entrepreneur? what was he?)
Mrs. ??? Borden, Andrew Borden's second wife
Lizzie Borden, Andrew Borden's elder daughter, a spinster
Emma Borden, Andrew Borden's younger daughter (was she also a spinster? how old was she?)
servant #1 (Bridget Sullivan?)
servant #2 (if any?)
and perhaps
Sarah Borden, deceased (what year?), Andrew Borden's first wife and mother to Lizzie and Emma
John Morse, Sarah Borden's brother
Would such additions be helpful to anyone else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mutzwerg ( talk • contribs) 22:01, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
SPINSTER???? What is this, 1894? Are you still calling black people negroes? Please remove. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Susan.dicey.k ( talk • contribs) 05:02, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I was shocked at how bad this article is. This is not a B rated article. I cleaned-up some of the sentences, but this needs enough work for 10 people. Stefan 72.56.50.76 ( talk) 13:37, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
The listings there are not referenced at all except for one of them. If this section doesn't get referrenced I suggest it all be deleted. It's a section that is being used for all kinds of trivial claims such as the Simpsons again which do not belong in this article at all. I will be going there and removing those kinds of comments out of the article after this edit. Thoughts on this since we are not to have things in articles that go unreferenced I think this needs to be taken care of. I haven't been on much so I was really surprised to see this addition added again. Thanks, -- CrohnieGal Talk 12:08, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Noticed Warehouse 13 gave this, a bit more "calculated", version of the rhyme:
Lizzie Borden took an ax And gave her father forty whacks. When the job was neatly done She gave her mother forty-one.
First of. Should not axe be ax, as this is US English?
From the article I am not able to tell whether they concluded on who was murdered first. This rhyme conclude the father, which would seem the most logical in the sense that the step mother was (asleep?) in her room. Was this ever specified? Are there any sources on what was the original. Which one is most used? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Essexesd ( talk • contribs) 01:40, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Toward the end of the trial section of the article it is noted that the step mother died first. I think the rhyme is sequenced the way it is simply because of the number of "whacks" and not for accuracy. True Crime Reader ( talk) 01:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't see how excluding the rhyme can be justified. It's part of the folklore behind Borden and many people knew the rhyme before they knew the story behind it. If you leave it out it will be like ignoring the giant elephant in the room. True Crime Reader ( talk) 16:25, 28 September 2010 (UTC)