Jump to content

Talk:Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured article candidateJacqueline Kennedy Onassis is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 28, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 20, 2004, October 20, 2005, and May 19, 2018.

Style of surname in article

[edit]

Much of the article refers to her with the surname "Kennedy" rather than "Kennedy Onasis". The article should either have its title changed, or the body of the article should probably be corrected to refer to her as "Kennedy Onasis". SecretName101 (talk) 00:02, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. The body of the article refers to her in different places by the name she used at the time being discussed. This has come up during the years of editing this piece and this is the method that is most sensible and comprehensible. It's not a typical situation, so we adapt the usual rules to make the most sense. Not changing the title of the article either - this has been the stable name for almost 20 years and it is the name she used for the majority of her life. Tvoz/talk 04:26, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The name she used and her common name can indeed differ. The question is what name she most commonly was referred to by the public.
There are areas of the article that need to be double-checked for what name they use. There are many areas that are interchanging the name usage in confusing ways. SecretName101 (talk) 06:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And, that fact that the article has used this name for a long name is not an argument against re-assessing the name. Plenty of articles have changed long-standing names. The article "Impeachment and acquittal of Andrew Johnson" was renamed to Impeachment of Andrew Johnson after nearly a decade. The article for Kyiv was long spelled "Kiev" (likely since near the creation of this project) until being renamed within this last year or so.
You can re-assess things. SecretName101 (talk) 06:32, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the article should refer to her in different places by the name she used at the time being covered. In legacy text, she should be called "Onassis" only (like it or not). --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:04, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Image Proposal

[edit]

Hello, there. I have reason to believe that this image is in the public domain and is a suitable replacement for the current one. Less light is concentrated on her face, not as blurry, et cetera.

That's all. Thanks. 71.184.82.123 (talk) 02:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 11 August 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: withdrawn; opening a new one with the overwhelming preference for the alt (non-admin closure) Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis → Jackie Kennedy – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Her sister's name is common name as are those of every 20th-century U.S. first lady. Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:12, 11 August 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 05:04, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This n-gram may be of help in deciding between Jacqueline and Jackie. Although equally recognized now, Jacqueline is prominent throughout most of the last 70 years (including during her years as First Lady). Randy Kryn (talk) 15:02, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Randy Kryn the thing is that Jackie is the name used in books and films and so on. she is popularly remembered as "Jackie" too. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:06, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, and that's how I would think of her as well. But for encyclopedic purposes her formal name denotes the importance of her impact on society and the functioning of the White House, as well as per the n-gram results which take the books into account. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:10, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of the first ladies I've listed have had that same effect too. To varying degrees and in different ways but they nonetheless did. I prefer that it be "Jackie" since, ultimately, it is the one she is best known by today and therefore fits WP:COMMONAME.
Just making my argument for it. Ultimately, I will go with the consensus. Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:40, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per @SNUGGUMS Killuminator (talk) 14:55, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Jacqueline Kennedy (Jackie is her informal nickname), whose seven-year marriage to Onassis was important to her full history yet per long-term significance does not equate with her Kennedy-based legacy and common name. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:58, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per @Omnis Scientia and @SNUGGUMS. UnspokenPassion (talk) 17:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose any name with Jackie. The other first ladies who we have at nicknames were almost solely known by and referred to by their nicknames. Kennedy Onassis is much more mixed, as Randy Kryn's ngram shows. Interesting if we compare Jacqueline Kennedy,Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis and subtract the count of "Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis" from "Jacqueline Kennedy", one finds the version without Onassis has stayed more common but less so than one might expect (with all the limitations of ngrams). I'm currently undecided about dropping Onassis or not. Skynxnex (talk) 19:56, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Skynxnex, I certainly have no objection to/prejudice against "Jacqueline Kennedy". Just making my argument FOR "Jackie Kennedy" which is my preference. Ultimately, my opinion is that the "Onassis" should be dropped as history remembers her more for her first marriage and connection with the Kennedys. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:25, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Her gravestone is set up well, with the 'Jacqueline Kennedy' on one line and the 'Onassis' by itself on a second line. Long-term significance will probably play out to 'Jacqueline Kennedy', with 'Jackie' as the common nickname but one which she wasn't known for in her lifetime as much as 'Jacqueline' (per the n-grams). Randy Kryn (talk) 22:32, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject New York City, WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment, WikiProject Greece, WikiProject Politics/American politics, WikiProject Fashion, WikiProject Literature, WikiProject Biography, WikiProject Politics, WikiProject Cape Cod and the Islands, WikiProject United States Government, WikiProject Franco-Americans, WikiProject Women's History, WikiProject United States, WikiProject Biography/Politics and government, and WikiProject United States Presidents have been notified of this discussion. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 05:04, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not specifically object to Jacqueline Kennedy.
I am not sure what is motivating this change. I have indeed read news articles in which she was called by her second married name. If this article had originally been titled by her first married name, it would be fine. But since it's titled by her second married name, that's fine too. I would think that, to flip the status quo of an old and popular article, there would have to be some fairly serious problem with the old name. That's not what I'm seeing. (Am I missing something?)
In other words, inertia is a thing. I have argued both sides of inertia before, and even recently, so I don't object to your starting a new RM. Bruce leverett (talk) 13:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 25 August 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Further, please do not withdraw move discussions after editors have already expressed support, as was done above. Dekimasuよ! 07:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis → Jacqueline Kennedy – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Her sister's (Lee Radziwill) and mother's name (Janet Lee Bouvier) are both married names they are best known by, not of their subsequent marriages, as are those of every 20th-century U.S. first lady. Further adding: her fame comes from her being first lady and her connection to the Kennedys. She did not become famous because of her second marriage and remained known as "former first lady". Historically now, she is known as "Mrs. Kennedy" or "Jackie/Jacqueline Kennedy" by historians and in books, films, bios, etc. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:37, 25 August 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. FOARP (talk) 14:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is irrelevant, this needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis. --Marbe166 (talk) 15:19, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marbe166, though it won't change your mind, I've added more to my rationale than just two family members (and will also throw in first lady Frances Cleveland who also remarried after being widowed). I personally don't agree with your assessment that she is more referred to by her second marriage name or that changing the article name to what she is best known as would, in any way, diminish her accomplishments or identity. Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @SNUGGUMS, @Killuminator, @Randy Kryn, @Skynxnex, @Nohomersryan, @Necrothesp, @UnspokenPassion, @Bruce leverett from previous RM. Apologies if I forgot someone. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:41, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also adding @Iwaqarhashmi. I think that's the only other commenter I missed. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nominator. Killuminator (talk) 13:42, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In a nutshell, I think this RM is thinly motivated. The n-gram shows that her second married name, while outnumbered by the first, is still in use. I can't bring myself to !vote in either direction on this. Bruce leverett (talk) 14:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, she continued to be famous when she was married to Onassis, and then she was more referred to as Onassis. Putting her only as Kennedy would diminish her fame to be that of only being the first lady, which is not correct. Alas, I don't support any move. --Marbe166 (talk) 15:17, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There are way too many names for this lady vying for the common name honor, Jackie and Jacqueline, both next to several different combinations Bouvier Kennedy, Kennedy Onassis, and so on. I was only 18 when she married Ari, so I've lived more than half a century thinking of her as Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis or just Jackie O. For baby boomers like myself, those are the top two common names. If I have to choose, then I would pick the more elegant of those two, the name that already titles this article. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 18:17, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. In the context specifically of the Kennedy administration, yes, she's known as Jackie Kennedy or Mrs. Kennedy or the like. But she was a famous, public figure for decades afterward where she was known as Jackie O / Onassis. I think your sample size is skewed - I'm sure serious historians of 1961-63 use the contemporary name, but there's a lot more personal history after that, and "celebrity" news matters too given that's what she lived much of her life as. Finally, it was already noted, but an argument for consistency with first ladies is a complete non-starter - each person should be judged on their own merits. If there's anything to be consistent with, it's people who lived for decades publicly as one name but lived by another name for a time before in general. SnowFire (talk) 19:14, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @SnowFire. I don't know what you mean by "sample size" but I was talking about what she is historically referred to and remembered as in general today, not just by historians and books and so on. For example Google ngram chart suggests strongly otherwise that people remember her as "Jacqueline Kennedy" rather than the full name with "Onassis".
    And, again, this is about WP:COMMONNAME, not her own personal preference or personal history after her second marriage. This is what I would also say in response to @Paine Ellsworth's vote. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:49, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, as I've said being, it will not erase her second marriage from the article. This RM is just acknowledging her historical name and role which is, ultimately, why she remained famous afterwards and why she is remembered today. You may disagree with the name but that's just historical fact. Omnis Scientia (talk) 19:55, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ngrams due to their nature are not the last word in regard to the common name or historical fact. I've always been a bit of a reader, and history has been a favorite subject of mine since those ancient times of the late sixties and seventies. So I will remain firm about the historical value of this article's present title. I know the subject as Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis and have since my late teens. I cannot discount what I've read over these many years. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 23:22, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Paine Ellsworth, to be clear, the ngrams wasn't my last word, it just a gauge as to what people today remember her as. I did make much wider argument and gave my reasons too. Omnis Scientia (talk) 00:04, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Omnis Scientia: To be clear, I agree COMMONNAME should dominate. However, your ngrams are not convincing. First, at risk of pointing out the obvious, but every hit for "Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis" is also a hit for "Jacqueline Kennedy". Second, of the remaining no-Onassis hits, many of these are for historic references to the pre-1968 period where calling her Onassis would be unusual. Third, you picked "Jacqueline", but she often went by "Jackie" in the media, and "Jackie O" in particular was a common media reference to her in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. Backing up a little, let's say for the sake of argument that 100% of sources on 1961-63 use "Kennedy", and 100% of sources on 68-94 use "Kennedy Onassis". Simply because she was First Lady at the time, there will be far, far, FAR more sources discussing the 1961-63 period, especially in published books (rather than, like, People magazine, which won't show up in ngrams), because US political history is very heavily chronicled. But the topic here is Jackie Kennedy, not US politics. So we need to look at what sources focusing on Jackie Kennedy (Onassis?) use, not the term sources on US & Cold War politics use that happen to mention her as a figure in the era. My impression is the same as Paine Ellsworth: when the topic is Jackie O in particular, she gets the Onassis. SnowFire (talk) 23:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @SnowFire, its just one of many in my overall argument, not the only one. I know how much n-grams are reliable; nevertheless, it does give a vague idea of what people search when they want to look her up. I think I made a strong argument OVERALL for dropping "Onassis" from the main title. I'm just not convinced by your that "she was known as Onassis longer than Kennedy".
    I would actually say that your argument is just strenghtening that she is better known as a "Kennedy" because historians specifically talk about her in that context and in relation to President Kennedy and the Kennedy family. Hence WP:COMMONNAME. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If this article was strictly on US history and was about a politician, then yes. But it isn't. Jackie Kennedy / O was a major celebrity who was in the news media all the time and was independently notable outside of politics as a celebrity. Being First Lady was one part of that, yes, but far from the only part. Ridiculous hypothetical: suppose, through a quirk of fate, that someone we know as a famous celebrity married a politician in an alternate universe and had 2 years doing that. Maybe John Lennon married Margaret Thatcher or something. There'd be a pile of new sources in this timeline on that 2 years of being First Gentleman / Lady, but that probably still won't outweigh the other stuff they still did, right? We'd trust whatever the other sources said on the other 30 years of their life. SnowFire (talk) 01:17, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @SnowFire Just going by that hypothetical, I think you're overestimating the how famous her post-First Lady life was. Her second marriage is famous only because of her first.
    Sorry but I just don't see what is wrong with a title which acknowledges why she is a historical figure. And that's the last thing I'll say on the matter. Either way, nice debate! Omnis Scientia (talk) 01:26, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per my comments in the previous move discussion above.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This was proposed 10 years ago, and then there was no consensus to move. I don't see that anything significant has changed since. --Marbe166 (talk) 07:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Its an old RM; people change their mind, more people have joined since who may have a different perspective. I don't see anything wrong with opening a new one. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I still support Jackie Kennedy. I don't think the previous RM should have been closed. There was plenty of support for Jackie Kennedy. This seems to have been procedurally incorrect and a unilateral decision by the proposer, who does not own the discussion once it's been initiated. I therefore propose closing this dicussion and reopening the previous discussion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Necrothesp, there was more support for "Jacqueline" than "Jackie" and it was getting confusing who supported who. My preference is to drop "Onassis" since I don't think that name is WP:COMMONNAME. On the other hand "Jacqueline" or "Jackie Kennedy" are the two most common and can be interchanged.
    This would be in line with Helen Taft who was also called Nellie Taft but her full name is the one used as the article title. Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:27, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    My point is that you had no right to close it. Once you'd nominated and others had commented it should have been left for an uninvolved editor to close. If Jacqueline was the most popular result (although I definitely dispute that that's her commonest name) then that could have been the closing result for that RM too. But the current situation is procedurally incorrect. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:34, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Necrothesp, I understandable if you disagree with how I went about it. But my RM's point was to drop "Onassis" and I felt it was getting away from that and into "Jackie" or "Jacqueline" quarrel and I don't want that to happen here as well. We can settle her first name if we manage to drop her second married name in this case. If you agree or disagree with that, I'd say vote accordingly. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have already said I continue to support Jackie Kennedy. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So by extension, you also support dropping "Onassis", correct? Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:30, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Paine Ellsworth and SnowFire. The fuller name we currently use is the all around best. Srnec (talk) 01:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Jackie Kennedy as first choice, and Jacqueline Kennedy as second choice per nom. The common name situation doesn't seem to be in much doubt looking at ngrams - [3] and I see little in the oppose votes above to persuade me that a move here isn't warranted. She's best known for being the wife of JFK after all.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:04, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose It wasn't her name when she died, or her name of choice. Also, people of my generation still refer to her as "Jackie O.". It's how she was best known for many years. Bastique ☎ call me! 16:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Aside from the obvious fact that it was the name she carried for longest, and was known by at her death, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis is also the title of the Britannica article. There's no ambiguity, nobody is even remotely confused by the name, she was a fixture in the press for nearly a quarter of a century under her second married name, and Aristotle Onassis was himself a notable figure, one of the richest men in the world. The fact that some people are unable to see her other than as the widow of JFK (and that, in the end, really only for the few years of JFK's presidency) really isn't our problem to fix. Guy (help! - typo?) 18:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wouldn't go so far to say "some people are unable to see her other than as the widow of JFK". The point in favor of moving is that even among people who do know about the Aristotle marriage, it's overshadowed by Jackie's affiliation with the Kennedys. This had nothing to do with confusion of names. Yes, the second husband was a famous guy and there was definitely attention surrounding this union, but it doesn't get as much recognition as being a First Lady. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 18:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • You highlight a certain point. She kept "Kennedy" in her name because she's a former first lady. It's always a part of her name. But unlike other former first ladies, she remarried after her husband's death, and lived a fairly long time with that name and identity. She is still known as a former first lady with the name Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis. Bastique ☎ call me! 19:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SNUGGUMS, That's simply not true. She was independently famous as "Jackie O". Guy (help! - typo?) 08:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Children in Infobox

[edit]

In Template:infobox person/doc#Parameters we find, under "children", this advice:

Typically the number of children (e.g., 3); only list names of independently notable or particularly relevant children. Names may be preceded by a number to show total children and avoid implying that named children are the only offspring. For multiple entries, use an inline list.

The number of children, 4, should of course appear. The child Arabella is not "independently notable" (i.e. there is no Wikipedia article about her), so she should not be listed. Overemphasis on this child, who was stillborn, is morbid. All the same considerations apply to John F. Kennedy as to Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis. Bruce leverett (talk) 01:42, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jacqueline_Kennedy_Onassis&oldid=1250941000"