Talk:Emily Post

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

There is no such verb as "to opinionate". "Opinionated" is an adjective, not the past tense of a verb. So "what she opinionated to be proper etiquette" is grammatically nonsense. "Opined" would be correct but is a bit obscure... I have changed it to "considered" instead. TomH 19:19, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Her date of birth[edit]

We currently say 27 October 1873.

Her grave says 27 October 1872.

This says 3 October 1873, and professes to refute alternative dates - “Emily Price's birth date is variously reported as October 3, 27, or 30, 1873”.

So that makes at least 4 different dates. Which, if any of them, is actually the correct date – and how can we be sure? -- JackofOz (talk) 16:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Her 2008 biography indicates there is no solution to the problem. Emily Post gave her birthdate as 27 October 1872. However, her brother, William Lee Price, who died in infancy, left behind (contemporary) burial records that give his dates as 18 April 1873-6 December 1875. But he can't have been born 5 months and 21 days after his sister. That she was born six months after him is equally unlikely. So something is awry, and it's apparently unresolvable from primary records.^[1] The likeliest explanation is she was born earlier and lied about her age; that burial records confused a 2 years old child's birth date is possible, but less likely. - Nunh-huh 10:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Nunh-huh, I missed your response at the time. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 05:06, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems silly to lie about being only one year younger. I don't think that you should assume she deliberately falsified her date of birth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.251.70.168 (talk) 19:12, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The NYTimes seems happy to go with the 3 October date - http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/on-this-day/october-3/ - I think we should flag on page that there's some debate about the date, no?

Yes, I've just edited the page to indicate that the birth date is questioned. - Nunh-huh 01:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

^ Claridge, Laura (2008). Emily Post: Daughter of the Gilded Age, Mistress of American Manners. Random House. pp. p. 18. ISBN 978-0-375-50921-6. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)

Notable descendants[edit]

Are they? Notable, that is. The litmus test for notability would usually be having their own article, so Peggy Post would be (if she was a descendant, which of course she isn't), whereas Peter Post wouldn't. There's also more than a little promo, with links to Amazon and non-notable blogs. Any thoughts? Bromley86 (talk) 05:35, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's worthwhile noting that a number of her relatives have carved out careers in the etiquette game, but these could be reduced to a simple list under a more appropriate heading. And yes, we should not be suggesting that Peggy Post was a descendant. - Nunh-huh 07:30, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Emily Post. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.infoplease.com/biography/var/emilypost.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070402112930/http://weddings.emilypost.com:80/ to http://weddings.emilypost.com/
Corrected formatting/usage for https://https
Corrected formatting/usage for https://https

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:45, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Claridge, Laura (2008). Emily Post: Daughter of the Gilded Age, Mistress of American Manners. Random House. pp. p. 18. ISBN 978-0-375-50921-6. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)

[1]