Talk:Jane Bunford

Biography assessment rating comment
WikiProject Biography Assessment Drive

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 05:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

It seems completely impossible to get any good picture of her skeleton to use on this page.There is a very small blurry picture of it published in the Guinness edition 1972. I am convinced that her skeleton must have been photographed more than once since it was mounted at the university for 83 years.Although I've been asking the Birmingham medical school for pictures of the skeleton they simply do not answer.Maybe a scoop for a newspaper? There may exist pictures of her alive in private photo albums.Maybe any journalist could contact them asking for pictures.Her school in Bartley Green and maybe any old medical journals may also have pictures of her.She also had a job at Cadbury's so they may have pictures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.64.114.73 (talk) 23:26, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

A photograph of her skeleton appears on this page.. tallestinbritain.blogspot.com (if you type that in google) and there is a photograph of a very tall woman with plaits with the smallest woman ever (I don't know if Jane looked liked that tall woman when she was alive or not). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 00:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok,Can someone get a better picture of her skeleton and maybe publish on this page?.The blurry picture in guinness is also published at tallestinbritain.blogspot.com but it is not a very good photograph.I've been trying to get a picture of her mounted skeleton from the university but it seems impossible since they for some reason don't care about my requests.Of course there must be any more pictures of the item considering the 83 years they had it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.64.114.73 (talk) 22:45, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

The photograph of her memorial stone and the skeleton photo have been included on her page. Is there any other information you know about her, as you seemed to know a few things in your statement made on the 22nd December 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 09:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately not very much more although I have been researching her a lot.Here is a little:She is said to have been "a cripple and in constant pain through joint problems and other ailments" her coffin measures 8 ft 4 inches possible the largest coffin in Britain.Her grave was then made up to appear of normal size.Some sources says that she would have measured "at least" 7 ft 11 with a straight back.Her story was featured several times on ATV today during 1971.They may have preserved the program which maybe includes pictures of her skeleton or her alive??It was then her relatives tried to get the attention down.Her brothers and sisters were alive then. The medical school informed that Jane was dying by her doctor and they were apparently allowed to extract her skeleton and return her remains for burial.In feb. 1972 she was featured in a general practitioners magazine.Professor Robert Arnott in Birmingham disposed off her skeleton in 2005 so he may have better pictures of her mounted skeleton.He seems very busy but you can try to send him an e-mail requesting pictures of her mounted skeleton.By looking at her skeleton we can draw the conclusion that she was not only tall but her bones were also very sturdy and heavy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.233.234.222 (talk) 19:40, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the extra tid-bits of information. Do you still have the February 1972 General Practitioners magazine article? You could scan it in to the wikipedia page. Her parents died before Jane. Yes I would have imagined she would have weighed quite a lot. Do you know Professor Arnott's email address. Seeing there is much chance as Steve McClaren being reappointed the England manager, or me being handed the Crown Jewels as getting a photograph of Jane when she was alive, I wonder it by emailing him he will send a photograph of her skeleton. Jane comes a cross as a very nice woman, but shy and retiring, but I wonder why her family are so secretive about her. It wasn't as if she did anything bad, hurt anyone or was someone to be ashamed of was it? I agree with her skeleton being reburied, as people gawped at her long enough and I think she deserved to be returned to her family plot and be buried with dignity. Did they have a funeral service for her in 2005? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 21:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

r.g.arnott@bham.ac.uk is his e-mail.Good luck getting a picture of her skeleton!The funeral in 2005 was private and not featured in any newspaper.Jane Bunford's life was indeed tragic and she was naturally embarrassed by her height. A difference between eg Robert Wadlow and Jane Bunford is that Robert was of enormous size since he was an infant so he probably adjusted himself to being a "freak" although his life was tragic he wasn't very shy about his appearance,But imagine a normal self-conscious 11-year old girl having such an accident growing to a height where you are a full upper body taller than normal women.She suffered a lot emotionally and I can understand that her relatives didn't want her known as a freak as she would make headlines just walking around in the town during daylight.As far as I am aware she never figured in any newspaper articles during her lifetime and no obituary was published in the local newspaper.I however agree that her family seems weirdly secretly about her.I also think it's odd that there still is so little documentation about her life from people remembering her since a 7 ft 11 tall hunchbacked woman with plaited red hair reaching the ground working as a babysitter is quite extreme to meet.People don't forget her. I think that there may exist pictures of Jane at school as children were often photographed in groups at school.You may request photos St Michaels school in Bartley Green(it does still exist). By the way, where did you get the information about her brother Henry and that her head injury came from a bicycle accident? It's not mentioned in your linked sources and how did you obtain her death certificate? Another thing,Councillor Jane James from Bartley Green is related to Jane Bunford.If I remember correctly she is the grandchild of one of her siblings.You may ask her about Jane Bunford but it may be sensitive to talk about a dead relative for her.As you see her family wants to keep her an enigma,Her e-mail is Jane.J.James@birmingham.gov.uk..........Good luck! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.233.234.222 (talk) 00:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree, her family are weirdly secretive about Jane. As I have wrote, it wasn't as if she murdered anyone or was insane or was someone to be ashamed of. I won't email Jane's relative. Her family were even opposed to the plaque being erected outside Bartley Green Library. www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-60511667.html

Yes I can understand that she suffered emotionally and she suffered physically, with her terrible spinal abnormality. She also died at a tragically young age. If she had been born in 1995, she wouldn't have grown to that height had she suffered the same accident, but she was born at the wrong time.

Had her height been abnormal from birth or at an age where she didn't know anything different, then it would have been easier for her to adjust, but she wasn't. This only started at the age of 11. Still I would have thought there would be a photograph available of her, either her skeleton or in person. The wikipedia article isn't portraying Jane as a freak. It doesn't make fun of her. It is very sympathetic in tone, as it highlights what she was - an individual of good character and a principled person (She turned money down for her hair and to appear in shows), whilst pointing out she was very shy. If you go to mirrorpix on google and type in her name, in the Daily Mirror on 3rd February 1972 there is an article which states "Body snatch mystery of giantess Jane". However unless you subscribe you won't be able to see the text. This perhaps is stating her family didn't know about her skeleton being removed, which if true, that they did it without their permission, it is a total disgrace. Personally, they should have asked Jane when she was dying what they were to do with her body, and should have therefore respected and followed HER wishes. I have never sent for her death certificate and I won't do so. It is listed in the Guinness Book of Records 1972 and states what she died of, where, and her brother registering the death and that he was present when she died. Information about her falling of a bike is on this group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/growthspurts2/ Type in her surname..

I suppose we will have to accept we won't find a photo of her and leave it at that, but if you ever find any more information, post on the wikipedia site, and I will do that.

This is the URL of the article "Body snatch mystery" http://www.mirrorarchive.co.uk/Archives/portal/enter.jsp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 09:30, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

If you find any Jane information out list it on here and I will put it on her wikipedia site, but if you ever find any photographs or documentation of Jane, put it on her wikipedia page.. I don't know how to do that... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 20:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

That includes the February 1972 GP article she was in... Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 08:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry But I can't find that article although I've been trying...Maybe you have better luck...have you got in touch with Professor Arnott? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.236.10.181 (talk) 21:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

No, not as of yet, but I intend to do so soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 17:18, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you remember the name of the GP magazine her article was in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 18:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Is everybody sure that this person was real? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.33.158.121 (talk) 23:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Are you a wind-up merchant? Of course she existed. Her 1895 birth certificate is available if you want to order it and so is her 1922 death certificate. Also, her death certificate is printed in the 1972 edition of the Guinness Book of Records which states she died of hyperpituitarism and gigantism. Her kyphoscoliosis probably contributed to her death as well. A photo of her skeleton is online. Just because she was shy and became a recluse doesn't mean she didn't exist. Just because no photographs of her are available doesn't mean she didn't exist and just because no photographs of her almost certainly will never be seen doesn't mean that she didn't live. No photographs exist of several giants and giantesses in the Guinness Book of Records, but there is no reason to doubt their existence either. Several people have said they remember her. Life was extremely cruel to Jane and dealt her a hand of cards she did nothing to deserve, but she definitely did exist.

How do you obtain the 11 february 1972 article about Jane? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.233.235.175 (talk) 00:08, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

The British Library in London has it... it is on the backpage of that newspaper, but contains some inaccurate information. It states she died in 1924 aged 24, when she died in 1922. It stated her growth started after she was immersed in boiling water in an accident, but the Guinness Book of records and other sources state she suffered an head injury in 1906 which triggered her abnormal growth. The article says she was 7ft 8in when she was at least 7ft 11in. However, that about the coffin being lighter than expected, her coffin being 2 feet across, that it was locked in the church on 4th/5th April 1922, that younger children were scared of Jane and it upset her, that she had a deep voice (Probably caused by gigantism) and had auburn hair are almost certainly true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 00:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Well,Could a head injury damaging her pituitary gland have been caused by the boiling water???It sounds like a very horrible accident by the way.Her head must have been completely cooked considering the location of the pituitary gland.It doesn't quite make sense to me since a pituitary damage would be more likely to result from falling from a window or a bicycle or that kind of trauma. Does the article contain any more interesting information?Are you able to copy it and paste it here or scan it up at tinypic or something? 2 feet across isn't very much.Her body would not have fitted into it considering her shoulder width.The 7'8 is probably just her height without considering spinal curvature. Well good to see that more information about her appears although there is still very little. It is really odd that she could manage to hide away and that there were so little public interest of her especially during the days of the freak shows.I wonder who the man repeatedly trying to get her into show business, offering to buy her hair for a vaste quantity of money was.I really wonder about her strength also since some pituitary giants were tremendously strong like the second tallest man ever, John Carroll who could lift a car with his two hands! Have you got any information from ATV today by the way? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.233.235.175 (talk) 02:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the bicycle accident is more credible, as according to the Yahoo group she suffered a fractured skull. If you look at the Guinness Book of Records photograph, there appears to be a line at the right hand side of her skull (I have the 1971 edition) and perhaps that is where the fracture was which she apparently sustained in 1906. I think 2 feet across seems ludicrous considering her 1971 skeleton measurement, so I have deleted it. I don't know who the man was who offered her the money for her hair. I think there was probably great interest of Jane during her life, and that is why she became a recluse, because she didn't want to exhibit herself and be remembered as a freak (Remember she turned down offers to appear in freak shows). I don't know anything about her strength and to be honest her funeral is as much of a mystery as her life. However, if you leave an email address or contact details, next week I will send you the email, or will include more information from the article. If at her funeral the pallbearers had inquired about how light the coffin was, the truth about her skeleton would have been uncovered then. As it was, the whereabouts would not be uncovered until 1971. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 09:04, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I haven't any information from the ATV programme, but I will keep searching.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 09:21, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

You mention that Jane's body wouldn't have fitted in a coffin two feet across. If they had buried someone as huge as Jane in a coffin, it wouldn't have, and it would have probably been about 3 feet or 4 feet across, but her skeleton had been removed by 4th April 1922, so that is why, if true, it did measure 2 feet. The coffin was 8ft 4in long (Jane was at least 7ft 11in tall if she could have stood erect when she died). It would be interesting to know how big her coffin was when she was reburied in 2005, or if they needed a new coffin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.18.89 (talk) 11:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

The article is getting quite good although so many things will probably never be known about her —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.64.115.143 (talk) 22:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

That's right, I will find out all I can but I am afraid many things about her will probably be never known, particularly after all this time. I can only write what I know. I don't want to make this article a work of fiction. Yesterday was the 86th anniversary of Jane's death by coincidence.

Anonymous contribution. Copied from the article. It does not add much information, especially in the introduction, where it was placed. gidonb (talk) 00:47, 22 March 2009 (UTC) "It is not known if any photographs were taken of Jane after the accident which she suffered in 1906, but if any such photographs still exist, they are extremely unlikely ever to be shown to or seen by the general public."

The text states that in 2005 “ ... Jane's skeleton was finally buried in her family plot. However, no headstone marks Jane's grave to this day. Only her mother has a headstone.” It’s the mother’s headstone that intrigues me. The only Bunford headstone I’ve been able to find in Bartley Green is “Jane, the dearly loved wife of Charles Bunford” and the date is November 30th 1913. So this is probably the headstone of Jane’s mother, also Jane. But then how do we explain “dearly beloved wife of Charles Bunford” when Jane’s father was John Bunford ? Any further information would be appreciated. Thank you. Martike (talk) 13:30, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

A comment above states "Councillor Jane James from Bartley Green is related to Jane Bunford. If I remember correctly she is the grandchild of one of her siblings. You may ask her about Jane Bunford ..." 'This is a false lead. Jane James has confirmed to me that she is NOT the grandchild of one of Jane's siblings.' Martike (talk) 10:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

That is strange... A Jane Bunford was buried at St Michael's Church on 3rd December 1913. Yet Jane's father was called John. He died in December 1916 aged 60. Documentation has stated that he is her father. That is mysterious that Charles is listed on her headstone, unless Charles was a nickname he had, like Jane was called Ginny? It is also a mystery how her father's name isn't on there. Jane's skeleton was not buried until 2005. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.102.31.178 (talk) 22:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

According to this, a Jane Bunford died in 1913 at Bartley Green aged 54.. but another Jane Bunford died in Birmingham in 1934 aged 77. Her mother was called Jane Andrews before marrying, and she is recorded as having been born in King's Norton in 1857. Either they got her age wrong when she died, or it wasn't her and she outlived her daughter by 12 years and died in 1934. http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/search.pl Perhaps Jane's mother outlived her daughter, but it was her brother who registered her death in 1922... Her father definitely died in 1916. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.102.31.178 (talk) 22:17, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Bad links
Most of the links listed in the references go to nonexistent webpages. Should they be deleted? 69.125.134.86 (talk) 03:26, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

This needs lots of TLC
This article is high on claims and light on evidence.

The intro says she was "2.41 metres (7 ft 11 in) at the time of her death ".

That is not referenced, so I guess it is supposed to be justified by the article text saying she was " 2.31 metres (7 ft 7 in) tall, in her final measurement taken when she was alive," but that it was estimated that she would have been 2.41 metres (7 ft 11 in) had she not developed the spinal curvature. The reference for that no longer exists.

The article says "On her 21st birthday Bunford was measured at 2.39 metres (7 ft 10 in) tall, her peak standing height". There is no reference for that claim.

In 1910 the Bartley Green council erected two plaques in the town recognising Bunford. This plaque (scroll down) says Bunford was 7 ft 9, but this plaque has 7 ft 11. You pays yer money, and.......

The intro says "She was the tallest person in the world during her lifetime, and she still may hold two further records – that she was twice the tallest living person in the world, – between 1916 and 1919, and between 20 May 1921 and 1 April 1922". A blog was given as a reference but that is now a dead link so it is unreferenced.

She couldn't have been world's tallest person in 1916-19 because that's when 8 ft 4 in Bernard Coyne was alive and as his article shows, his war registration card from 1918 records him at 8 ft. His article lists him as world's Tallest Recognised Person 1915?-1921.

Our text says Bunford's peak standing height was 7 ft 10 in, but that too is unreferenced.

Why does the intro mention adjustment for spinal curvature, when height is measured from ground to top of head. Where's the reliable reference for that anyway?

Comments? Moriori (talk) 02:43, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jane Bunford. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071017163318/http://web.ukonline.co.uk/m.gratton/ to http://web.ukonline.co.uk/m.gratton/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:26, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Joyce Carpenter
Why is Jane Bunford recognised for being one of the UKs tallest women whilst references to Joyce Carpenter of Bromsgrove who was the shortest recorded adult in the UK have been removed? This is a clear case of Wikipedia being sizeist213.205.242.126 (talk) 08:48, 11 May 2018 (UTC).