Template:Did you know nominations/Ruth Williams Cupp
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Amkgp (talk) 11:45, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Ruth Williams Cupp
- ... that Ruth Williams Cupp was the first woman admitted to the Charleston County Bar Association and served in the South Carolina House of Representatives as the only woman at the time. Source: [1] ("When Ruth took office in 1963 she was the House’s only female....I was the first female to attend the Charleston County Bar.").
- ... ALT1:that Ruth Williams Cupp lost her bid for re-election in 1964 in part for supporting Lyndon Johnson? Source: [2] ("Ruth lost her bid for re-election in 1964 for a variety of reasons, including her involvement in Lyndon Johnson’s presidential campaign").
Created/expanded by Remember (talk). Self-nominated at 19:00, 11 November 2020 (UTC).
-
- I am working on it. Been busy with personal matters but will get to it shortly. Remember (talk) 20:56, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
- So the info on this picture is that it was bought and paid for by Ruth Cupp herself. She had professional pictures taken of her back in the day (like glamour shots). And now those that manage her estate had this picture. I can have them write an email to that effect. Is that what should be done? Remember (talk) 02:25, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Copyright of photographs generally belongs to the photographer/agency unless contractually stated otherwise. If the Cupp estate now owns copyright, they will need to provide clear evidence of permission. Please see Commons:OTRS, especially the section If you are NOT the copyright holder. --Animalparty! (talk) 20:10, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
- So the info on this picture is that it was bought and paid for by Ruth Cupp herself. She had professional pictures taken of her back in the day (like glamour shots). And now those that manage her estate had this picture. I can have them write an email to that effect. Is that what should be done? Remember (talk) 02:25, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- I am working on it. Been busy with personal matters but will get to it shortly. Remember (talk) 20:56, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
- I think the image licensing was sorted out by deleting the original image and adding a new one. But discussion is still taking place on the article talk page about article improvements. Yoninah (talk) 21:17, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- I think it's just a couple of comments from User:Wehwalt at the bottom of the page. Was there something else? Remember (talk) 21:31, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Ready for full review. Yoninah (talk) 22:09, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
1. Yet to review the whole thing, but Remember, have you done a QPQ yet?
- I haven't reviewed another DYK. I am happy to if that is what should be done. I have never done one before so I'm afraid of screwing it up but happy to give it a try. Any suggestions on how to start?Remember (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
- Working on St. Michael, Kaubenheim. Remember (talk) 13:08, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
2. Not seeing
Alice Ruth Williams
and Patsy Hughes Mizell
being mentioned. Moultrie source says Patsy Williams Mizell?
- Added source for patsy full name and further information on her from obit. Remember (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
- Does this count as a source for the name Alice?Remember (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
3. Not seeing
majored in social work
in Winthrop Magazine. I saw it in Moultrie, but I think Winthrop Magazine is a better source for this claim? Social work isn't sociology or political science.
4. after passage of the Civil Rights Act
- not in the source, is this significant to Cupp?
- Politicians in the south that supported LBJ after the 1964 Civil Rights Act got wiped out in general. I believe that is what the source I was cited was referring to. But I can remove the Civil Rights Act claim because the source doesn't spell it out. Remember (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
5. I don't think the history of Winthrop College is needed in this article.
- I am happy to remove. I added it because I thought a previous editor wanted more information on this. Remember (talk) 15:09, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
6. Source for
1968 to 1972
?
7. Source for
In the forward to the book, Cupp states: "While I was not born here, my heart and soul were".
8. Source that the legislative terms began in January and ended in December, for the infobox? Or remove the dates?
9. Definitely work more on paraphrasing, there's too much that follows the sources. I've done some more of that for you. starship.paint (talk) 12:04, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
I think I did all the things requested. Let me know how best to meet the needs of QPQ. Also, I was able to get a copy of Portia Steps Up to the Bar. I was planning on adding information from the book into the article but I don't want that to mess up the DYK. Any suggestions on whether to add the information or hold off? Remember (talk) 20:33, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
- I'd add stuff and not worry about that. For the quid pro quo, see WP:QPQ.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:04, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
- Sounds good. I will add stuff and then try my hand at QPQ! Remember (talk) 22:15, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Remember: - please address 2 and 4, above. Thanks! starship.paint (talk) 12:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Done. I also added new information from her book to the article. Remember (talk) 21:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Remember: - right, the article is ready except for the QPQ (review of someone else's DYK). For the offline references, the content is accepted in good faith. starship.paint (talk) 04:01, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- Excellent! I have taken on the task of reviewing St. Michael, Kaubenheim. I don't know what needs to be completed in order for me to check that box but I am starting to review now. Remember (talk) 13:04, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Remember: - right, the article is ready except for the QPQ (review of someone else's DYK). For the offline references, the content is accepted in good faith. starship.paint (talk) 04:01, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- Done. I also added new information from her book to the article. Remember (talk) 21:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Remember: - please address 2 and 4, above. Thanks! starship.paint (talk) 12:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Sounds good. I will add stuff and then try my hand at QPQ! Remember (talk) 22:15, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
- good to go with main hook. starship.paint (talk) 14:34, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
How do I make sure this runs on December 16? Remember (talk) 15:50, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
I've moved this to the special occasions holding area for December 16. However, I find that ALT0 hits you between the eyes with "first woman" and I think you should try for something more interesting to the other half of the human race. Here is a suggestion, although any other hook angle could be suggested:
- ALT2:
... that Ruth Williams Cupp, the first woman admitted to the Charleston County Bar Association in 1954, found out 50 years later that one of the senior members had objected to her presence?Yoninah (talk) 15:27, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- ALT2:
I prefer mine. But to give some new suggestions how about the following:
- ALT3: ... that Ruth Williams Cupp, the first woman admitted to the Charleston County Bar Association in 1954, was still barred by law from serving on juries like all women in South Carolina until 1967? Remember (talk) 20:33, 13 December 2020 (UTC) ("It took a decade of work before South Carolina finally decided in 1967 to allow women to be jurors in state courts." State article)
- ALT4: ... that Ruth Williams Cupp, the first woman admitted to the Charleston County Bar Association in 1954, when admitted to the bar had to promise not to settle disputes by dueling? Remember (talk) 20:33, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
ALT3 is great, thanks. We need a review. Pinging Starship.paint. Yoninah (talk) 20:42, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- If we need to add another source besides Cupp's own book, here is a source on South Carolina and female juries - State article. Remember (talk) 20:47, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
