Jump to content

Talk:Caroline Reboux

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleCaroline Reboux was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 18, 2022Good article nomineeListed
February 25, 2023Good article reassessmentDelisted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on August 31, 2008.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Caroline Reboux was known as the Queen of the Milliners?
Current status: Delisted good article

Untitled

[edit]

Like many of her customers, Caroline Reboux was self-invented: she put it about that she was the fourth child of an impoverished noblewoman and a man of letters, who was orphaned and came to Paris to live." That's how I'd handle these "facts".--Wetman (talk) 23:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Caroline Reboux. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 02:57, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Caroline Reboux/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Alanna the Brave (talk · contribs) 15:23, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I'll be reviewing this article. Comments to follow over the next few days! Alanna the Brave (talk) 15:23, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
Okay -- I've finished my initial comments. This is an interesting article, and it seems both stable and neutral. The article follows MOS guidelines. Most of the prose is clear, but I'd like to discuss other article aspects before doing a more thorough prose check. No concerns regarding copyvio issues: although Earwig has flagged three sites [1][2][3] as showing significant similarities, I'm confident in concluding that they have copied the Wikipedia article (not the other way around), and I've added a backwards copy notice regarding the most substantial article copy. There are certain aspects of the Wikipedia article that need additional improvement, however: some prose has no cited source, some content seems superfluous (while other areas could use expanding), and I have some questions about the relevance of photos currently included. I've provided more detailed comments below. I'm going to put the article on hold for seven days -- please let me know if you have any questions. Alanna the Brave (talk) 23:04, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Photos

[edit]
  • I have questions about the photo of Reboux in the infobox – Where does it come from? Can we be certain that it’s actually a photo of Reboux? Something about the photo quality strikes me as not being from pre-1890 (as claimed in Commons info), and the source says only that it comes from "Brochure" (what brochure?). I did a scan for photos on Newspapers.com, and I found this photo of Reboux from 1901, which is quite different.



Lead

[edit]
  • Reboux's date of birth and death should be cited.


  • Lead needs some expansion. Where/when exactly did she work? When did she start and/or find success? What were the specific highlights of her career?

Queen of the milliners

[edit]



  • "She employed as many as 150 workwomen at any one time." --> Looking at the cited source, I think it would be more accurate to say that she was employing this number of workwomen during the year 1898, specifically.
  •  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]



  • "Reboux also did innovative unique models up-dating past modes such as the large-brimmed straws known as Gainsborough hats, and the turban-like toques in the manner of Mme Vigée-Lebrun's sitters." --> Is there a source for this?
  •  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:04, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  • "During Reboux's life she maintained a great friendship with the fashion designer Madeleine Vionnet. The Caroline Reboux business finally closed its doors in 1956. More than 300 creations by Reboux are preserved at the Musée de la Mode et du Textile in Paris." --> Is there a source for this?
  •  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 14:54, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  • "The Caroline Reboux business finally closed its doors in 1956. More than 300 creations by Reboux are preserved at the Musée de la Mode et du Textile in Paris." --> This content seems more fitting for the death/legacy section.
  •  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 14:15, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Famous clients

[edit]
  • "The exhibition of Marlene Dietrich "Birth of a Myth" was held at the fashion museum Musée Galliera (Paris) in 2003 exhibing fashions of Reboux. There are today headdresses signed "Caroline Reboux" in the vitrines devoted to Marlene Dietrich at the Deutsche Kinemathek film museum of Berlin. Many famous designers of fashion of the 20th century were trained by Reboux." --> Is there a source for this?
  •  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:54, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]



  • I think it would make more sense for all the content in this section to be re-distributed between Reboux’s main career section and the death/legacy section. Everything from the time before Reboux’s death (e.g., clients before 1927) can go into career, while everything post-1927 (e.g., modern-day exhibitions) can go into legacy.
  •  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Death and legacy

[edit]


Reboux in fiction

[edit]
  • This section contains only one mention of Reboux in fiction, and it seems to be only a passing mention (Caroline Reboux does not appear as an actual character, and I’m guessing this piece of Reboux clothing is not integral to the plot of the story!). Unless you have other content of substance to add to this section, I think it’s worthwhile cutting it entirely.
  •  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:16, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


References

[edit]


SECOND READTHROUGH

[edit]
@Doug Coldwell: The article is looking much stronger than it was before, but I'm still seeing sourcing/citation issues (listed below), and I think the article needs some rewriting/reorganizing of prose in order to avoid confusing jumps back and forth in time. Comments below. Alanna the Brave (talk) 17:00, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Alanna the Brave: Thanks for the second readthrough. I'll start working on those.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:14, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Doug Coldwell: Apologies for the wait! I've been a bit distracted from Wikipedia work over the past couple of weeks. Bookmarking some more time for this tomorrow. Alanna the Brave (talk) 23:21, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Career

[edit]
  • Unclear date of birth: your cited source McDowell says that Reboux was born during the 1830s (not 1840). I’m guessing you’ve extrapolated that year of birth from Reboux’s obituary (cited in the lead section), which says that she was 87 when she died in 1927, but she could have been born in late 1839 (or the obituary could have gotten her age wrong). If you’re going to go with 1840, you’ll need to cite the year with the same obituary source in both lead and main text and include a "circa" to indicate the uncertainty.
  •  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:21, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  • "Reboux was 'discovered' by Princess Pauline Metternich and had a 'smart establishment' in Paris in 1870" --> I’m not seeing this information clearly supported by the cited source. The sentence may need a rewrite.
  •  Done - The source of McDowell on page 204 on the first column at bottom says, Madame Reboux, like Charles Worth, was discovered by Princess Matternich. She opened her 'smart establishment' at 23 rue de la Paris in 1870 and was one of the top milliners in Paris.... --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:06, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]



  • "She is also closely associated with the origins of haute couture and her hat designs ranked at the same level as that custom fashion" – The wording of this sentence feels a bit unclear. How is she "closely associated" with the origins of haute couture? Did she help originate the term itself, or was she simply early in designing custom-fitting clothing for customers? How did her hats "rank at the same level" (who was ranking them??).
  •  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:35, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  • "Elsa Triolet was also a regular store customer on Avenue Matignon." --> Okay, the cited source for this is an Etsy product description (first issue), but on top of that I’m also pretty sure it’s copying text from the Wikipedia article (a lot of the phrasing is way too close). You’ll have to replace this source or cut the info.
  •  Done - Cut out the info. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:39, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  • "She also started the vogue of colored veils." –-> claim not clearly supported by the source.
  •  Done - The news clip reference says, Brilliantly colored lace veils are the new fashion note in veildom. The fashion is sponsored by Caroline Reboux. Synonyms for "sponsored" are initiated, originated, and instituted (started).. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:37, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]



  • The overall quality of prose is reasonably solid at this point (I’ve made some copy edits for clarity), but I think the article has some structural issues relating to how information is organized. The narrative jumps back and forth in time in confusing ways. For example, you mention that Reboux employed 150 women during 1898, then that Triolet was a regular customer at Avenue Matignon, and THEN you mention that Reboux opened her Matignon shop in 1865. I suggest taking some time to reorganize this Career section into a more chronological narrative (where possible). Think about how the reader might logically be expected to progress through the story.
  •  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk)

Death and legacy

[edit]
  • "Her business at 23 Rue de la Paix in Paris (originally opened in 1870) continued until 1956 under the direction of Lucienne Rebate, a longtime associate of the French luxury fashion business Chanel as a publicist." –-> One of the cited sources ("Caroline Reboux / (French,active 1870-1956)") is a Pinterest collection of images, and I’m skeptical of how reliable it is. I think it would be better used as an external link rather than a main source.
  •  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:34, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  • "More than 300 creations by Reboux are preserved at the Musée de la Mode et du Textile in Paris." –-> Says who? The cited source is a craft blog, and I'm not sure how reliable this is.
  •  Done - Took out. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:17, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]



  • "In 2003, the exhibition of Marlene Dietrich "Birth of a Myth" was held at fashion museum Musée Galliera (Paris), displaying Reboux fashion" –-> This is another Etsy source that’s likely a copy of Wikipedia. You’ll need to replace the source or cut the info.
  •  Done Took out. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:17, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  • "and there are headdresses signed "Caroline Reboux" in the displays devoted to Dietrich at the Deutsche Kinemathek film museum of Berlin" --> Another Etsy/Wikipedia copy source. It’s got to go!
  •  Done Took out. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:17, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Final comments/queries
[edit]

@Doug Coldwell: Thanks for your patience. Since your last round of edits, I've completed some additional copy edits and have checked almost all other sources/citations for accuracy (looks good to me). I have just three more queries. Alanna the Brave (talk) 00:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • The infobox says that Reboux is buried in France. Do you have a source to confirm this? The cited obituaries don't specify a place of burial.
Are there any stronger published sources? BillionGraves looks a little too similar to Find-a-Grave, which has been labeled unreliable as a cited source due to its user-generated content. Alanna the Brave (talk) 20:59, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Alanna the Brave: There are a couple of English newspapers that say Reboux died in 1927. The reports came from Paris. I believe the BillionGraves source. There are no other sources that say the actual cemetery where she is buried.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see where you're coming from, and for personal research purposes I might use BillionGraves myself, but the GA criteria requires that "all inline citations are from reliable sources," and the Wikipedia community doesn't consider user-generated content to be a reliable source. As a compromise: how about we remove the burial info from the infobox, but keep the BillionGraves link as an external link at the end of the article? It's entirely possible that the info is accurate, but to meet GA standards it needs a different type of sourcing to back it up in the main text. Alanna the Brave (talk) 22:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • From the lead: "Reboux made an art form out of high fashion hats, which were re-emerging in France to supplant the bonnet in the mid-19th century. She promoted the hat as an essential accessory for women's fashion." --> this info is not explicitly mentioned or cited in the main text of the article. Do you have to a source for this, and can you add it to the main text?


  • From the Career section: "Rose Valois, an equally successful milliner in her own right, was set up in 1927 by Reboux's former employee, Madame Fernand Cleuet, along with Vera Leigh, and a third employee." --> Can you confirm whether Rose Valois was a person or an establishment? At least one of your sources treats Valois like a person, but Wikipedia and Google both suggest that Rose Valois was in fact a business set up by the three Reboux employees. This may require another source.
That's what Waddell says, but not your other source (Perkins 1949, p.63). I'm only able to access a snippet version, but it says that Valois was Madame Fernand Cleuet: "In private life Madame Fernand Cleuet, Rose Valois made her first trip to America one year ago, and loved it, but she is a Parisienne born and bred."[4] There is also a 1947 news piece from The Gazette that mentions Rose Valois and "her husband, Fernand Cleuet." It seems reasonably clear from these two sources that Valois was a business pseudonym for Madame Cleuet. Do you agree? And do you have full access to that Perkins source? Alanna the Brave (talk) 20:59, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Alanna the Brave: No, do not have full access to the Perkins source. However, on the snippet version on page 64 it says, In personal appearance, Rose Valois is a brisk and smiling blonde, a little on the plump side and surprisingly youthful for the head of a house approaching its 21st birthday. <--search Google Books. To me all indications are Rose Valois is a flesh and blood person that was trained into the hat business by Caroline Reboux.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Alanna the Brave: Keep in mind the Perkins book was published in 1949. I believe that Rose Valois opened her own hat shop at 18 rue Royal in Paris in 1927. 1927 + 21 = 1948. Everything tells me she was a plump blonde running her own business, that was probably known as "Rose Valois". --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:53, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Alanna the Brave: In the Rose Valois article I believe the unidentified third woman is the flesh and blood real person Rose Valois -> a plump blonde.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:29, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... At this point, I'm not disputing there was a French milliner established in 1927 calling herself Rose Valois -- I just don't think Rose Valois was her real name. I think she was Madame Cleuet using the name Valois (like a professional actor using a stage name). However -- we're both basing our conclusions on a very small snippet of text. Is it okay with you if I make an effort this week to get a hold of the Perkins source? I think I can request a full photocopy of those pages via library document delivery, and that might help clarify things for us, one way or another. I don't want to draw this out too long, but want to make sure we're being as reasonably accurate as we can be. Alanna the Brave (talk) 22:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome -- I'll let you know when I have them (and I'll try to be quick). Alanna the Brave (talk) 23:57, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Doug Coldwell: I've listed two responses above. Alanna the Brave (talk) 20:59, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Doug Coldwell: Two more responses above (suggested compromises). Nearly there! Alanna the Brave (talk) 22:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Doug Coldwell: Alrighty -- now that we've sorted out the Valois question, I'm satisfied that the article now meets GA criteria. Thanks for all the hard work! Just as an aside: I don't know what you decided about the validity of that previous Reboux photo (the one sourced from a brochure), but if you have any serious reason to doubt its authenticity, you should probably update the Wiki Commons description accordingly to help ensure that other editors don't use it by mistake. All the best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 16:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
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: rejected by BlueMoonset (talk) 04:50, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not eligible due to prior appearance at DYK.

(
)
  • ... that Caroline Reboux was known as the queen of creative fashion hats? Source: For over fifty years, Reboux was known as the queen of creative fashion hats. Red Hat Society: red hats & the women who wear them. Sterling Publishing Company. ISBN BookSources/1-57990-994-9.
    • ALT1: ... that Caroline Reboux was the first person in fashion design to add a veil to women's hats? Source: She was the first person in fashion design to add a veil to a woman's hat. Contini, Mila, Odyssey Press (1965), Fashion, from Ancient Egypt to the Present Day, p. 254; Caroline Reboux was the first person in the history of fashion to think of adding a little veil to the hat, swathing the feminine face in a mist ....
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: No QPQ as I am under 5 credits.

Improved to Good Article status by Doug Coldwell (talk). Nominated by EpicPupper (talk) at 23:40, 18 February 2022 (UTC).[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:22, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment

[edit]

This article is part of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 and the Good article (GA) drive to reassess and potentially delist over 200 GAs that might contain copyright and other problems. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of articles en masse, unless a reviewer opens an independent review and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information about the GA status of this article, the timeline and process for delisting, and suggestions for improvements. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Caroline_Reboux&oldid=1208423110"