This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 January 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rena225.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 04:07, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I have edited Mildred and Richard Loving and Richard Loving to redirect to here, instead of Loving v Virginia. However, it seems to me that it might be better to title this article Mildred and Richard Loving, with a redirect from here to there instead. The change would only require a slight rewording of the opening, as near as I can tell. I don't know how to change a page title, though.-- Ramsey2006 ( talk) 17:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Re: taking out the "Matriarch of mixed marriages" quote, it has been used in multiple headlines, from different sources, so there certainly is no lie in saying that she has been called that. I believe the text of one article also referred to her that way. Now the article is missing a clear lead-in that states why it is of historical/general interest. I'm not one to get into an "undo" revision war with someone, but I disagree with your decision, there, Ramsey2006. Netmouse ( talk) 17:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I just wanted to add that I believe this article should be titled Mildred and Richard Loving, not Mildred Loving. While she did live longer, and got more media coverage than him because of it, they are notable only as a couple. Mildred herself said she was not a political person, and I doubt either of them would ever have been notable if it hadn't been for Loving v. Virginia (a twist of fate, one might say). I'm not going to change it, just throwing in my $.02. 76.103.213.78 ( talk) 00:03, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
While it is a good start, this article could really use a photograph. No doubt it had one at some point only to be removed by the "freedom" extremists. I suggest, now that she is dead, that a case can be made for a fair-use image. -- Dragon695 ( talk) 21:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was consensus to move.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 02:03, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I am requesting that this article be moved from Mildred Loving to Mildred and Richard Loving. This section is for the discussion of the merits (or lack thereof) of this move. -- Ramsey2006 ( talk) 01:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
This article is really about both of them. Their notability in wikipedia is directly and solely tied to their being a married couple in a significant and historic US Supreme Court ruling reguarding marriage rights. There is no significant chance of either Mildred or Richard ever having their own articles separate from their joint article. As near as I can tell, no editing (or very minor copy editing) of the actual article would be required for the title change, as the article in reality is already about both of them. -- Ramsey2006 ( talk) 01:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
There is more than enough about the couple to merit an article separate from the court case. Particularly now that there are full-length documentaries about their lives as well as the context of the case.
I don't believe she was ever called Mildred Delores Jeter Loving; she was born M.D.Jeter and later changed her name to M.D.Loving. I've changed the name in the opening sentence accordingly. – SJ + 02:28, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 January 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rena225.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 04:07, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I have edited Mildred and Richard Loving and Richard Loving to redirect to here, instead of Loving v Virginia. However, it seems to me that it might be better to title this article Mildred and Richard Loving, with a redirect from here to there instead. The change would only require a slight rewording of the opening, as near as I can tell. I don't know how to change a page title, though.-- Ramsey2006 ( talk) 17:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Re: taking out the "Matriarch of mixed marriages" quote, it has been used in multiple headlines, from different sources, so there certainly is no lie in saying that she has been called that. I believe the text of one article also referred to her that way. Now the article is missing a clear lead-in that states why it is of historical/general interest. I'm not one to get into an "undo" revision war with someone, but I disagree with your decision, there, Ramsey2006. Netmouse ( talk) 17:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I just wanted to add that I believe this article should be titled Mildred and Richard Loving, not Mildred Loving. While she did live longer, and got more media coverage than him because of it, they are notable only as a couple. Mildred herself said she was not a political person, and I doubt either of them would ever have been notable if it hadn't been for Loving v. Virginia (a twist of fate, one might say). I'm not going to change it, just throwing in my $.02. 76.103.213.78 ( talk) 00:03, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
While it is a good start, this article could really use a photograph. No doubt it had one at some point only to be removed by the "freedom" extremists. I suggest, now that she is dead, that a case can be made for a fair-use image. -- Dragon695 ( talk) 21:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was consensus to move.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 02:03, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I am requesting that this article be moved from Mildred Loving to Mildred and Richard Loving. This section is for the discussion of the merits (or lack thereof) of this move. -- Ramsey2006 ( talk) 01:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
This article is really about both of them. Their notability in wikipedia is directly and solely tied to their being a married couple in a significant and historic US Supreme Court ruling reguarding marriage rights. There is no significant chance of either Mildred or Richard ever having their own articles separate from their joint article. As near as I can tell, no editing (or very minor copy editing) of the actual article would be required for the title change, as the article in reality is already about both of them. -- Ramsey2006 ( talk) 01:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
There is more than enough about the couple to merit an article separate from the court case. Particularly now that there are full-length documentaries about their lives as well as the context of the case.
I don't believe she was ever called Mildred Delores Jeter Loving; she was born M.D.Jeter and later changed her name to M.D.Loving. I've changed the name in the opening sentence accordingly. – SJ + 02:28, 13 June 2020 (UTC)