Talk:Eartha Kitt/Archive 1

Archive 1

Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Assessment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 03:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Gay Icon Project

In my effort to merge the now-deleted list from the article Gay icon to the Gay icons category, I have added this page to the category. I engaged in this effort as a "human script", adding everyone from the list to the category, bypassing the fact-checking stage. That is what I am relying on you to do. Please check the article Gay icon and make a judgment as to whether this person or group fits the category. By distributing this task from the regular editors of one article to the regular editors of several articles, I believe that the task of fact-checking this information can be expedited. Thank you very much. Philwelch 21:04, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"I Love Men"?

No mentioning of "I Love Men", that's strange. Was in 1984, too. -andy 80.129.88.142 10:59, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Possible error?

alternating between signature songs (such as Old Fashioned Millionaire) Does the writer perhaps mean Just An Old Fashioned Girl? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TrottieTrue (talk • contribs) 15:43, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Naruto??

Hadn't she have a role of the girl form of orchimaru in naruto?..Kingdomheartsora — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingdomheartsora (talk • contribs) 02:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I can only say, it is not notable enough to add to the article. Lincher 06:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I can't confirm or deny offhand but I would argue for its inclusion if it can be confirmed. That type of work seems slightly unusual compared to the rest of the article, and Naruto is an extremely popular series. Seems notable to me. From where did you hear that?Meichigo (talk) 06:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Professionally exiled

Is this really the best way of saying what happened after she "made" Lady Bird Johnson cry. This makes it sound like the USA was akin to the Soviet Union, where no public opinions other than the official line were tolerated. Whate ever happened to freedom of speech, particularly about war-related matters? JackofOz 21:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't you remember the outcry against the Dixie Chix a few years ago? Meichigo (talk) 06:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

She was, as I recall, put on an "enemies list" by Nixon/Agnew/FBI, in a much publicized story at the time. Compare [1] which is, btw, a fairly good reference about her life as an activist. David.daileyatsrudotedu (talk) 13:58, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Recall that Lady Bird Johnson had significant and extensive holdings in the television and radio industry.John Paul Parks (talk) 22:13, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Eartha Kitt: Rush Limbaugh fan

You can spin/interpret this any way but:

Eartha Kitt attends lighting National Christmas Tree with George W. Bush

So far:

1. 1 She attended Rush's show and was on his radio show in the past (Early 90's)

1. 2 She recently (December 2006) stood next to President George Bush in a non-political rally. In that pic, I didn't see Eartha giving Bush grief? Do you think the Dixie Chicks would of done the same?

1. 3 Eartha Kitt on Bruce Springsteen:

"I think that Springsteen is playing into the hands of the enemy," she said. "I think that it is wrong for us to stand on a stage where people have paid to hear us sing or play an instrument and entertain them - it is the wrong place for politics. But if you ask me a question, if I was in the dressing room, I would give you an opinion.'

link to forum thread

1. 4 Interview quote with Eartha

"Q: Youve always been known as strong and independent-- someone who does it her way or not at all. Fair assumption?

""A: I never want someone else to be responsible for me. Everytime I say that, I also mean I dont want the government to be responsible for me. I want them to get out of my way and allow me to be responsible for myself. ... Just leave me alone so that I can do my own thing. "

Individual responsibility is what Rush's core beliefs are. So again, made perfect sense why Eartha would have something in common with Limbaugh and make this known by appearing on his show.

Unless I read/see otherwise, I think Eartha's a Republican (I don't think this is a big deal and not Wiki-worthy). Except for her being a fan of Rush (That's trivia worthy).

---

Not to get into any type of argument/political debate/whatever

I vividly recall Eartha Kitt being an open fan of Rush Limbaugh and was seen on Rush's show in the early 90's "The Rush Limbaugh Show" (She was seated in the audience)

Rush enthusiastically pointed her out and she did her trademark 'purr' to Rush.

I'm sure this clip will end up someday on youtube (I don't have it)

This basically made me want to know more about Eartha and have since been a fan of her work.

Is it relevant as a Wiki entry? I think it makes for interesting trivia.

Well I'm not sure simply appearing in the audience of something makes you a fan. Did she say something to that effect? People have sat in his audience before that could not be more opposed to his ideology, so a simple appearance in the audience would not be enough to convince me. Plus, we would have to point out that she was a fan in the early 1990s if she did state she was a fan on the show; opinions and outlooks can change when this much time has passed. As an aside note, Eartha seems too intelligent to be a Limbaughite. But that last part is just my POV. I have asked for a citation in the article, and if one is not provided I will remove it soon. Also, please sign your posts. (Mind meal 06:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC))

"Eartha seems too intelligent to be a Limbaughite" I suggest you keep out of this then. I'm not trying to make this political and I can remain unbiased on this topic.

You're basically expressing a knee-jerk reaction and that's not akin to creating an effective wiki-entry.

I'm sure if you dug into the archives are Rush's websites, you could find the episode where she 'purred' and smiled at Rush. Even then you'd probably would debate that Eartha's purr was a 'sarcastic one'.

I will also say that I am not opposed to this if the facts actually lead us there, but appearances on someone's show hardly make you a fan. If you have a reliable source or transcript where she actually says to Rush or another interviewer that she is a fan of his, then I will obviously accept it as true. As of yet, no evidence has been presented outside of a claim. As for radio show appearances, Rush has invited political enemies on his show and interviewed them numerous times. (Mind meal 06:35, 10 June 2007 (UTC))

Alright, but the fact remains that Eartha was more than just a onetime guest. She exchanged correspondences/dialogues with Rush. I don't know

what it was about, but it would be wrong to assume that she's against what Rush stands for. This was over ten years ago. So if you want to dig, :::maybe you can find more info on this. Either way, I've seen people who hate Rush Limbaugh and they certainly

wouldn't of smiled and 'purred' at the guy. A scowl would of been more appropriate?

I still think this is a trivia-worthy wiki entry.

It is trivia worthy, provided you have a citation where she says she is a fan of Rush Limbaugh. Putting unsourced material in an article is like begging for someone to delete it. As for her purring at Rush, Jon Stewart has people who are diametrically opposed to his views on and they will joke back and forth with one another; Dennis Millers' appearances on his show would be one example. Like I have already stated, if you have a citation I'd be happy to let it stay. But simply appearing on a show hardly qualifies someone automatically as a fan. Do you see my point? In order to include this information, she needs to have said, "I am a fan of Rush Limbaugh". If not that, then a book citation stating she is would suffice. Something. Right now we have nothing at all. Again, please sign your posts when posting on talk pages. Oh, and I did try to "dig", to no avail. Besides, that really is not my job, as I did not insert the material. The onus is on you to prove what you have entered. Take care. (Mind meal 18:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC))

Please read the above points I posted. You wouldn't see the "Dixie Chicks" attending the Christmas lighting ceremony. Eartha's a classy woman, so it only makes sense she'd be a Republican. Framecut 18:46, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I take that to mean you don't have a citation or reference. This is silly, either reference your work or don't bother. (Mind meal 22:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC))

Link to Feb 16, 1994 reference

Eartha Kitt was a guest recently on Rush's TV show. They had been exchanging correspondence recently, yet Rush was hesitant to call her a 'fan' on the air. Now why would Eartha Kitt, a black woman, correspond with and attend the TV show of a man who supposedly hates blacks?

Rush didn't use the word 'fan', I recall him pointing her out and saying something along the lines of "We are fortunate to have the 'one, the only Eartha Kitt here in our audience ladies and gentlemen'", the camera then cut to Eartha "Purring" to Rush which prompted the audience to laugh.

So basically, you can't say I am making this stuff up. Also, the fact that Eartha was recently (2006 White House) with George Bush, adds to her Republican leanings.

I'm putting it back in. It's not a stretch of the imagination that Eartha is a fan/supporter of Rush/Republicanism.

My goodness, I don't know that you are even trying to understand all of this. I couldn't give a hoot whether she is Republican or not. That is not what this is about. I really do not want to get into an edit war over this. Citing a Google forum post by an anonymous user is hardly a reliable source of information. I dare say it is basically worthless. This encyclopedia thrives best on referenced material for a reason, so that we don't go inserting our suspicions or views into articles. Facts matter here, and gosh darnit if you can prove that she is a fan of Rush Limbaugh, then please do it. You still have not done so, and yet you place it right back in the article as if it were a fact. I will remove it again and report these incidents so an administrator can have a look and make a decision. I just added tons of information about Lionel Hampton, a hero of mine, about his Republicanism. I couldn't care less where the facts lead me. But I do care about facts. (Mind meal 23:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC))

Remove - I agree with Mind meal. Appearing on Limbaugh's show doesn't make Eartha a "Rush Limbaugh fan". Standing next to President Bush doesn't make her a Republican, and if she is indeed a Republican that doesn't necessarily make her a "Rush Limbaugh fan".

Framecut, if you cannot source your statement, please do not attempt to include it in the article. It's fairly simple, really. ^{SkyIsFalling 17:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC) (UTC)}

Do I see a 'revert-war' in the horizon? Framecut 22:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what you see on your horizon, but an edit war is certainly not my agenda. I have merely supplied a third opinion on the matter, and asked that you do not include unsourced statements. On the other hand, if you can find a reliable source for your statement, I'd be happy to see it included.

I hope that this is acceptable to you and that there is no need for further dispute resolution action. If it is not acceptable, I'd encourage you to list this dispute over at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies and wait for feedback before making further edits. ^{SkyIsFalling 03:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)}

Cherokee Heritage

I know personally that she is of Native American heritage. However, can someone find a source stating this about her heritage. Thank YouMcelite (talk) 22:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)mcelite

Is the Cherokee ancestry on her father's side or mother's side? Anyone know what proportion Amerinidian she was? F W Nietzsche (talk) 00:17, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Cite from Obit article on MSNBC.COM. Of course, if you could find her autobiography that'd be best. Padillah (talk) 16:31, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Foraging

"Kitt was born Eartha Mae Keith on a cotton plantation in the tiny town of North, South Carolina. She had stated that her mother was of Cherokee and African-American descent, and her father, German and Dutch descent. She claimed she was conceived of rape.[4] She was raised by Anna Mae Riley, a black woman whom she believed to be her mother, but after Riley’s death, she was sent to live in New York City with Mamie Kitt . ... Kitt reportedly suffered abuse and neglect at the hands of a family to whom Anna Mae Riley entrusted her or “given away for slavery” as Kitt described " http://badgals-radio.com/its-the-eartha-kitt-show-ggggggggrrrrrrrrr/

"As soon as the children could walk, they were sent into the fields to pick cotton. It was a harsh existence of overbearing poverty with no electricity. Kitt had to cook, clean and work for her board. At 8, her childhood was rocked by an act of betrayal that marked her for life. Anna Mae went to live with a black man, who welcomed her darker daughter but refused to accept the mixed-race child. He said: “I do not want that yella gal in my house.” Decades later, the insult still rings in Kitt’s ears. “I still think I’m an ugly duckling,” she says. ": http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article3722562.ece I am trying to find an interview I heard where she described having to live in the woods and forage after being abandoned by her "mother" and her new man who refused to let her into the house. She lived in the woods with someone, I remembered it as her mother but see that is wrong. Anybody any ideas about this period before she went to Harlem? LookingGlass (talk) 15:46, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Turkey

She was in Turkey as a singer in Istanbul in 1950. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.175.131.194 (talk) 15:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Why the hell is this important info missing from this article?

In 1968, Lyndon and Lady Bird Johnson invited Kitt to a celebrity women's luncheon at the White House to offer her views on inner-city youth. Taking the event seriously, not as a publicity stunt, Kitt pointedly criticized the Vietnam War and its impact on poor minorities. An infuriated Johnson put out the word that Kitt's rudeness had reduced the First Lady to tears, and Kitt found herself essentially blacklisted across the country -- afraid of incurring the government's wrath, venues simply refused to book her. It was later revealed that Kitt was made the subject of a secret federal investigation; her house was bugged and she was tailed by Secret Service agents. When the FBI failed to find evidence that Kitt was a subversive, the CIA compiled a highly speculative dossier that attempted to portray her as a nymphomaniac. Unable to find work in America, Kitt moved to Europe, where she would spend most of the following decade. In 1974, she courted controversy once again by touring South Africa; although she performed for white-only audiences, her show was racially integrated, and she raised money for black schools by selling autographs.

Kitt finally returned to the U.S. for good in 1978 as a cast member of the Broadway show Timbuktu, an all-black adaptation of Kismet. The audience greeted her with a standing ovation, and she went on to earn a second Tony nomination; President Carter even welcomed her back personally. Cowicide (talk) 12:27, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I think this is extremely important biographical info71.130.128.188 (talk) 06:24, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Birthname, Keith or Kitt

Someone changed the birthname from "Eartha Mae Keith" to "Eartha Mae Kitt". The International Herald Tribune or New York Times say she was born "Eartha Mae Keith", while Reuters or the Australian Broadcasting Corporation have "Eartha Mae Kitt".

Her own website mentions "Keith" twice:

• here ("to Kitt's immense surprise, the researchers uncovered a birth certificate for one Eartha Mae Keith, born in St. Matthews, S.C")
• and here ("A decade ago, Kitt performed at Benedict College in Columbia, the capital of her native South Carolina. The college located her birth certificate. It gave her place of birth as the tiny rural town of St Matthew’s. She was listed as “Eartha Mae Keith” – a spelling of her surname she had never seen before.").

Incapable of weaving this into the article right now, but thought I'd post it here meanwhile. ---Sluzzelin talk 15:13, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know which is right, but it should be changed. At the moment it's inconsistent - the article says 'Keith', the infobox says 'Kitt'. VenomousConcept (talk) 21:42, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Actual birthday.

We've apparently got conflicting citations regarding her birthday. The one I've got says she used to celebrate it on Jan 26th (still not the 27th like the present citation) but her actual birthday on her birth certificate is Jan 17th. I made the change because my information is more recent but I still want to ask, who's more right? Padillah (talk) 16:33, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

The recency of the discovery of her birth certificate may be interesting enough to mention in the article, assuming the birth certificate found in 1997 is genuine (and assuming the report can be verified elsewhere (USCA's own article mentions the assignment which led to students locating her birth certificate, but doesn't reveal its contents). The two articles I linked, one thread above, are from Women's Wear Daily [2] and The Times [3]. Both state that the birth certificate marks Keith as her surname and The Times article also gives January 17th. All three articles either point out or imply that she hadn't known either fact for the first 70 years of her life. The USCA article says she herself wrote about how she didn't know her exact age in Alone with Me (1976). ---Sluzzelin talk 23:49, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation?

How do you pronounce her first name?--76.167.77.165 (talk) 20:15, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

"ER-thah", just like if you take the a off the end Earth-ah. (per NPR announcers, radio and news anchors and Casey Kasem) Padillah (talk) 20:38, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Definitely. Varlaam (talk) 22:04, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Name of her birth town

How can we best phrase this so people will stop changing it?

Kitt was born Eartha Mae Keith on a cotton plantation in the town of North, South Carolina, a small town in Orangeburg County near Columbia, South Carolina.

I was thinking something along these lines:

Kitt was born Eartha Mae Keith on a South Carolina cotton plantation in the town of North, a small town in Orangeburg County near Columbia.

Anybody got anything better? Padillah (talk) 19:43, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Career sections

I just wanted to propose we do away with separating her career into sections such as film, Broadway and music, because her career was not a linear one and one was not in isolation from another. It also constrains editors when they attempt to actually provide a semblance of continuity where such a continuity exists. (Mind meal (talk) 16:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC))

???

why does her most iconic role (Catwoman) have only one sentence devoted to it in this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.178.227.253 (talk) 01:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I think a lot of us who grew up during the 1960s are still wondering why they went for this peculiar woman when they could have had Julie Newmar.

Varlaam (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Orson's remark

His opinion is fairly well known, but it would be good to have the original sourcing on that. Newspaper interview? Varlaam (talk) 22:00, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Rape?

I am not too certain about the inclusion of this statement in particular, or what it's based on:
"Kitt was conceived by rape.[4][5]"
Can't log in to The Times to read the first source, and the second source does not mention anything beyond this:
"She was the illegitimate child of a black Cherokee sharecropper mother and a white man of German descent about whom Ms. Kitt knew little, except that he was the son of the owner of the farm she was born on."
While the idea of rape does seem to come up in an article mentioned in the section called "Foraging" above, the source for the statement in that article leads right back to the Wikipedia page and the Times article that I can't read . As part of a biographical article, unless this was something Kitt explicitly said or claimed to be an essential part of her life story, this statement feels unnecessary (not to mention jarring), and the sources a bit tenuous.
I propose a removal of that sentence in particular and a slight revision to the paragraph describing the origin of her parents to be more specific, something along the lines that she was the illegitimate child of a black Cherokee sharecropper and a white man who owned the farm she was born on. That would at least be truer to the second source cited for the original statement. Miriemirie (talk) 12:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

References

Main photo

I don't believe the main photo was taken in 2006, as the caption suggests. The Flickr photostream from which the photo is taken features many older photos, and the photo from 2007 looks much different from the main photo. I don't know when the photo was taken, but if anyone does, it might be a good idea to change it. Delaywaves • talk 22:24, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Copyright violation

@107.214.30.15: By extensively quoting a text you found on [6] you are violating the copyright of the one who owns this text. The website literally says MommyNoire™ Copyright © 2012-2013 Moguldom Media Group. All Rights Reserved. WP:COPYLINK has nothing to do with it. WP:COPYVIO does. The problem is not the link, but the quote. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 17:53, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

To claim a Wikipedia policy that explicitly proves you are incorrect, has "nothing to do with it", simply illustrates that you either do not know Wikipedia policy and/or have apparently no interest in applying it. However, that policy is how things are done around here. The fact is, quotes are regularly used in BLPs and elsewhere, on this project. Those quotes are perfectly legitimate for use as long as they, and their source, are properly attributed. This case meets both of those criteria.

Taken another way, your interpretation of WP:COPYVIO is incorrect. It would mean that no direct quotes from any newspaper or magazine sources may be used by this project, because they are subject to the copyright protection of those publications. Quotes from any exclusive interview could not be reprinted here - despite attribution - because of copyright concerns? Nonsense. That use is a basic tenet of WP's reuse and fair use and comport with copyright law, as is explained in WP policies. So again, rather than dismissing those policies as applied, like you did with WP:COPYLINK, you need to review it. It's pretty clear:

"Since most recently-created works are copyrighted, almost any Wikipedia article which cites its sources will link to copyrighted material. It is not necessary to obtain the permission of a copyright holder before linking to copyrighted material, just as an author of a book does not need permission to cite someone else's work in their bibliography. Likewise, Wikipedia is not restricted to linking only to CC-BY-SA or open-source content."

Also, you need to understand that on Wikipedia, another policy: called WP:CONSENSUS prevails. I agree with the editor who originally posted the quote. I find that as long as the quote is properly sourced and attributed - as this one is - it conforms with WP policy. Also fyi, the quote itself IS NOT what is copywritten, but the article in which it appears IS. So there is no factual basis to your inherently flawed objection. So the question now becomes: who is in agreement with you? Where is your consensus?

So to prevent an edit war, I suggest that before you revert it again, which could now constitute a 3RR violation, you need to build consensus for your position. So far you have not done that. And other editors have out-voted you. 107.214.30.15 (talk) 00:46, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

The lines you are quoting here are not about copying text, but about making citations, (i.e. making links). That is a different thing. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 07:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Once again, your interpretation is incorrect. Just read the first sentence of the policy. It could not be clearer. But again, and more importantly, do not revert again without gaining CONSENSUS. 107.214.30.15 (talk) 19:29, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

The most relevant guideline is probably Wikipedia:Non-free content, which is linked to from Wikipedia:Copyrights, the basic policy on the subject. The relevant section of Wikipedia:Non-free content says:

"Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea. In all cases, a citation is required. Copyrighted text that is used verbatim must be attributed with quotation marks or other standard notation, such as block quotes. Any alterations must be clearly marked, i.e., [brackets] for added text, an ellipsis (...) for removed text, and emphasis noted after the quotation as "(emphasis added)" or "(emphasis in the original)". Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited. Please see both WP:QUOTE for use and formatting issues in using quotations, and WP:MOSQUOTE for style guidelines related to quoting."

So properly attributed quotes are allowed, but they should not be "extensive". And user:107.214.30.15, Jan Arkesteijn is correct, the WP:COPYLINK page is relevant for linking TO works outside of Wikipedia not for including or quoting them. The quote in question looks rather long to me, i would recommend editing it to use a shorter portion. But how long a quote is "extensive" is always a judgment call. DES ^(talk) 17:37, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

I do believe some version of WP:FAIRUSE is most likely the prevailing policy here. I also agree that the amount of text that is permissible under fair use is a judgment call. In this case, while yes, the blockquote is a little longer than a line or two, I've certainly seen longer quotes in other articles that have survived without conflict. The problem here with this quote, is just what part(s) would you edit out? It's a pretty tightly constructed and continuous paragraph, so to willy-nilly disrupt its flow by arbitrarily removing section(s) simply to service some non-specific notion of brevity seems ill-advised to me. Perhaps you could recommend what part(s) you would delete? 2602:306:BD61:E0F0:7DA4:6AD6:6A5F:B001 (talk) 18:54, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

WP:FAIRUSE is just an alias for Wikipedia:Non-free content so we are in agreement on the relevant policy. As for how to edit the quote, perhaps somethin like the following:

"I was with her when she died. She left this world literally screaming at the top of her lungs. I was with her constantly, ... She was home for the last few weeks when the doctor told us there was nothing they could do anymore. Up until the last two days, she was still moving around. The doctor told us she will leave very quickly and her body will just start to shutdown. But when she left, she left the world with a bang, she left it how she lived it. She screamed her way out of here, literally. I truly believe her survival instincts were so part of her DNA that she was not going to go quietly or willingly. It was just the two of us hanging out [during the last days] she was very funny. We didn’t have to [talk] because I always knew how she felt about me, I was the love of her life, so the last part of her life we didn’t have to have these heart to heart talks."

or even

"I was with her when she died. She left this world literally screaming at the top of her lungs. I was with her constantly, ... She was home for the last few weeks when the doctor told us there was nothing they could do anymore. Up until the last two days, she was still moving around. The doctor told us she will leave very quickly and her body will just start to shutdown. But when she left, she left the world with a bang, she left it how she lived it. She screamed her way out of here, literally."

But if the consensus of editors at this page is to use the full quote as it now stands, I don't think that would be horrid or forbidded. I would say this is about as long as a direct quote should usually be, in my view. But each circumstance is different. DES ^(talk) 19:42, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

It now appears that the policy issue is finally resolved and we can put to rest any concern that we can't use the quote. So that's a good thing. Thank you! I also think that while you did an excellent job of trying to edit the quote, your edits really just illustrate the difficulty in doing so with this paragraph. For me, the only part that's really superfluous is: "she lived not even 3 miles from my house". That could go. I could also see merging the last sentence into the first paragraph so that it's at least just one whole paragraph. But beyond that, I would agree with you, as well as support leaving all the rest as is. It's really too good to muck around with, just for the sake of mucking. 107.214.30.15 (talk) 20:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Fair use, it is in practice also an alias for misuse of copyright. We never considered to skip the quote altogether, and just use the essential information and a reference. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 10:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Sounds exactly like the response one might expect from a copyright attorney who's lost one-too-many fair use cases. Plus your own edit log contradicts you. But the takeaway is that most agree the quote should stay intact. Good. 2602:306:BD61:E0F0:B9A5:67C4:1B39:A44A (talk) 04:18, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, I'm not an attorney. My concern is that we have to prevent being sued, because we cannot afford it. Plus, I don't know what you mean with my edit log being contradictory. I don't violate copyright, as far as I know. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 09:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I never said you were an attorney. I said your response sounded like something an attorney, on the losing end of a fair use case, would make. But your claim that "we never considered to skip the quote altogether" is a harder sell - since that's exactly what your edits here, here, here and here all tried to do! The edit logs blatantly contradict your claim. And your fear about us getting sued also seems misinformed, esp. since, as the admin informed you, "Wikipedia:Non-free content, which is linked to from Wikipedia:Copyrights" addresses copyright laws and our compliance with the policy. You asked that people take a look and we did. So at this point, any continued worry that this project might get sued over this single, fully-attributed paragraph, just seems like unsupported and unsupportable hysteria. 2602:306:BD61:E0F0:4D96:C703:6E19:D2CD (talk) 17:52, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Nickname?

Any particular reason her first autobiography is called Thursday's Child when she was born on a MONDAY?!

Early hit song of hers or something?

Not obvious in her discog. 209.172.23.165 (talk) 22:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

I have no source but I believe she chose that title because of the old English nursery rhyme that assigns different qualities to a child based on the day of birth. Most (though not all) versions assign Thursday with 'Thursday's Child has far to go' - perhaps she identified with that more then 'Monday's child is fair of face'. Although she was certainly that, in various interviews she stated that she considered herself 'an ugly duckling'. Clue Slezak (talk) 01:51, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Early life section

The early life section is very confusing. Do we know her real mother's name? Someone Keith, I assume, but the article never specifies where she got the surname Keith from. It says, "Kitt was raised by Anna Mae Riley, a black woman whom she believed to be her mother"; does that mean she was using the name Eartha Mae Riley at the time? In the sentence "When she was eight, Anna Mae went to live with a black man", it isn't at all clear at first reading that "she" refers to Eartha and not to Anna Mae. Who is Mamie Kitt? Where did she come from? Some relative of the white man who may or may not have raped Eartha's mother? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:48, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Hmm... I've attempted to clarify it a little, but without much success - based mainly on this source. That refers to her mother as Mamie Kitt, but another source claims that Kitt was Eartha's father's name. It's very confusing. Is there a more definitive explanation? Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:02, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

That article makes it sound like no one is really 100% sure who either of her parents was. It says Mamie Kitt was "in Kitt's estimation Eartha's biological mother", so she had guesses as to who her father was and who her mother was, but not certainty. And still no indication where the name "Keith" came from; the similarity of the names "Keith" and "Kitt" is suspicious but could of course be coincidental. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:27, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

This article says that her mother was Annie Mae Keitt (a good compromise between "Kitt" and "Keith"!), and that her true father may have been a white doctor called Daniel Sturkie. Who knows? But the article should probably just report the uncertainty and conflicting sources. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)