Talk:Marie Lloyd

Biography assessment rating comment
WikiProject Biography Assessment

Barely a B; could use more references.

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 16:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Grave
Can someone put in exactly where her grave is "North London" is much too big a place! john mullen
 * HTH Kbthompson 13:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

According to W Macqueen-Pope's biography "Queen of the Music Halls" she was buried in Fortune Green Cemetery. He also describes her last performance in Edmonton, not a week later at the Alhambra Theatre. Robert Steel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.21.248.204 (talk) 23:35, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Copyvio?
Not sure which is the copy this or that but see http://www.peopleplayuk.org.uk/guided_tours/music_hall_tour/music_hall_stars/lloyd.php "In one famous incident... and doing herself no favours." and this text from this article "In one famous incident, ... She did herself no favours." the site is not cited and the words are very similar. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 00:24, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

WP: Women's History Assessment Commentary
Assessed as C-class, for lack of references. Boneyard90 (talk) 10:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposed replacement of content
Does anybody have any objections if I swap the current article for a version I have been working on of late. I intend to eventually make this featured content. Any thoughts? --  Cassianto Talk   00:41, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


 * An excellent plan: let me know if you need proofing or assistance. - SchroCat (talk) 13:22, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the offer which I shall greatfully take you up on. I will hunt down some  sources at the BL over the next few weeks and report back. Since replaced! --   Cassianto Talk    14:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

From B to C class.
I agree. It is on my "to do" list but I keep getting distracted. I have all the literature but I'm finding it difficult to commit right now. --  Cassianto Talk    18:01, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

"The Three Ages of Woman"
Does this now make sense? --  Cassianto Talk    12:41, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * '"The Three Ages of Woman", which took a cynical look from a female's perspective of the opposite sex' - the opposite sex being men, then, even though the title has 'Woman'? Rothorpe (talk) 12:55, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree that this is not clear. Can you clarify, Cassianto?  -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:15, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Mustn't forget this. Who's looking at whom? Rothorpe (talk) 10:43, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Basically, It was Lloyd making comic observations about the opposite sex. But I'm damned if I can find it now. I have looked EVERYWHERE! --  Cassianto Talk    11:22, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I've rewritten it accordingly. Rothorpe (talk) 11:36, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * doh, there it is! Yes, the edit looks great and makes much more sense, thanks.   --   Cassianto Talk    11:48, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Marie no longer starry
So we were wrong (on my talk page), it doesn't rhyme with 'starry' but has the conventional French/English pronunciation? Rothorpe (talk) 12:02, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, her name does rhyme with starry, but the correct thing to do would be to put the pronunciation template in (like we said). After a lot of flpping and save previews, I managed to do it, but it asked me for the pronunciation.  I thought the pronunciation of "Marie" (rhyming with "starry")  sounded a bit French, so I opted for that.  I also found a citation from Gillies, who also used the "starry" rhyme. Would this be correct? --   Cassianto Talk    17:58, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No, the starry Marie is very much an English pronunciation, one might say a Victorian one; it's the modern pron that is like the French, roughly. But not to worry, I've put both starry and the IPA in now. Rothorpe (talk) 18:58, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Great. Remind me never to use my dodgy pronunciations in France...  --  Cassianto Talk    04:52, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the work on this important cultural figure
As an American professor who took his PhD in 19th century studies at Columbia, I am grateful for this article. Since Steven Marcus's The Other Victorians, followed by works by Foucault and Peter Gay, we've tried to balance old accounts of the era by restoring to the prominence they genuinely held such figures as Lloyd. Leaving her and her audience out of cultural history is a bit like writing about contemporary America without writing about rap and its huge audience. It's important for a scholar to know that the Victorian lower classes could make a star of someone who sang songs like (to quote the article) "She Sits Among the Cabbages and Peas",[95] which she retitled "I Sits Amongst the Cabbages and Leeks" after some protest.[96] Victorian life wasn't only Sundays of grim middle-class bible study with one's room's pictures turned to the wall. Profhum (talk) 16:52, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * is comments like this that make all my effort researching and writing this article all the more worth it. Thank you for taking the time to read the article and for commenting here.  Cassianto talk 00:15, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Screen portrayals of Lloyd
According to ShroCat, at any rate, who is seems believes that the IMBD entries of the TV productions in which Lloyd appears are either about another "Marie Lloyd," or else... what? Made up? Despite the fact that Miss Marie Lloyd - Queen of The Music Hall has its own page, we can't mention it here; despite the fact that The Edwardians and Edward the Seventh are available on DVD, and anyone watching them can see that the "Marie Lloyd" characters in there are this Marie Lloyd, we can't mention them here. Nick Cooper (talk) 20:13, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Can you point to the edit where I've said there are no screen portrayals? What I have said is that IMDB is not a WP:reliable source for use on Wikipedia. I've also said a little more about the section being so poorly written that it shouldn't be in any half-decent article, let alone an FA, and trying to crowbar such a terrible mess into the article is a poor way to approach article development. As talk page headings have to be neutral, I've altered the rather pointy one that was initially in place. - SchroCat (talk) 20:21, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Nope, I reinstated the content that was previously removed. Clearly you think it better to pretend it never existed than actually "improve" it yourself. Nick Cooper (talk) 20:46, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Don't try (again) to misrepresent me, or try and double guess my position. If you think it's worth adding the information in there (a moot point in it's own right), then not only will it have to be written properly (which it previously wasn't), but it will have to be supported by reliable sources (which it also wasn't). - SchroCat (talk) 20:54, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


 * So what do you actually think constitutes a "reliable source" for the existence of a TV programme? Seems to me that there are thousands of references to TV programmes across Wikipedia, and nobody's demanding a secondary source to confirm, "yes, this is real," for them. Nick Cooper (talk) 21:19, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * There are lots of things that constitute reliable sources, including most books, magazines and newspapers, but not IMDB, which is not considered reliable. Although there may be other unreferenced information on Wiki, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS doesn't justify adding unsourced information to articles. - SchroCat (talk) 05:44, 19 June 2014 (UTC)


 * from the fact that your edits are poorly written and unreliably sourced, they are also trivial. To mention some half-baked television drama which post dates the article subject by nearly 85 years, is completely unnecessary.   Cassianto talk 00:23, 19 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Ah, so we get to it. It's really just snobbery on your part (which I guess also explains your condescending attitude on my Talk page) that "half-baked television drama" featuring the subject of a Wikipedia page "doesn't count." Gaming the system by invoking WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS doesn't wash. Sources for films and TV programmes are needed for reactions and specific details, not to establish that they actually exist, which the ones featuring Lloyd clearly do. What's the point of, say, referencing the Radio Times they were originally listed in? And which production exactly is "half-baked"? The BBC4 one? The one by Alan Plater?
 * It's rather ironic that in this particular case we're dealing with a popular media and entertainment figure of her day, but God forbid that we acknowledge that her influence in that sphere continued long after her death. How utterly pathetic. Nick Cooper (talk) 06:14, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure in what thread I've referred to anything being "half-baked", could you provide a diff? If not, then stop misrepresenting my position please. The bottom line here is that a reliable source is needed to support any inclusion of information. There is no snobbery, and your forays into uncivil accusations are an unwelcome development. - SchroCat (talk) 07:22, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I think he is referring to me. The half-baked drama of which I speak is the awful Jessie Wallace vehicle which was made all the more worse by the principal stars terrible performance. That, I might add, is just MY opinion.  Nobody here has said that her influence failed to continue after her death, I actually agree with you that it has, but I refuse to allow a wall of unsourced and badly composed writing, which is nothing more than a list of factoidial trivia, to be added to a featured article.  Cassianto talk 07:47, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No, it was Cassianto who came up with the "half-baked" snobbery, but I doubt you can blame crossed-wires for your condescending comments on my Talk page. Obviously you two have staked your fence out round this article, so I'll leave you both to it. Nick Cooper (talk) 08:50, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Asking you not to edit war, and to provide sources isn't being condescending, and not is it staking out any form of fence: it's sticking to the required policies that demand citations from reliable sources are required. I'm really not sure why that is a difficult line to follow, given how fundamental it is to all articles. - SchroCat (talk) 09:20, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Professional debut
The intro says " In 1884, she made her professional début as Bella Delmere; she changed her stage name to Marie Lloyd the following year," but the Early career section has her starting her solo career in 1885, under the name Matilda Wood, with the name Bella Delmere coming later. Can anyone clarify? Drmab (talk) 22:17, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I am currently away, but I will check the sources when I get back. I suspect, "Matilda Wood" has been confused with Bella Delmere as the former was the name of Lloyd's mother.  Thanks for pointing this out.  Cassianto talk 00:40, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

W Macqueen-Pope's biography "Queen of the Music Halls" says she chose the name Belle Delmore having previously appeared under her own name. However, he implies she appeared as Tilly Wood. It must be coincidence that when Marie was on picket-duty during the 1907 strike another performer called Belle Elmore tried to cross the picket line. When others tried to stop her Marie said "Let her play. She will do more to help by playing than by stopping out". Belle Elmore subsequently found fame as Mrs Crippin. Robert Steel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.21.248.204 (talk) 23:57, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Indeed. And I think that is mentioned, is it not?   Cassianto Talk   08:02, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Extended audience
The meaning of the phrase "earned her an extended audience" in the lead isn't clear, it isn't in the body of the article (and is therefore uncited), and the year given (1919) contradicts the year given for perfomance of the song in the body (1918). SpinningSpark 16:06, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
 * So much better through the art of communication. Now done.   Cassianto Talk   17:52, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marie Lloyd. 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/20130905125320/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/things-to-do/visiting-the-city/archives-and-city-history/london-metropolitan-archives/Documents/visitor-information/47-theatre-and-music-hall-sources-at-lma.pdf to http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/things-to-do/visiting-the-city/archives-and-city-history/london-metropolitan-archives/Documents/visitor-information/47-theatre-and-music-hall-sources-at-lma.pdf

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) 11:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

"A Little of What You Fancy Does You Good"
I started an article on "A Little of What You Fancy Does You Good", which all sources I've found say was published in 1915, and recorded by Lloyd in 1916. However, this article states that Lloyd popularised it in 1914. Can anyone who is an expert on Lloyd (I'm not) clarify this point? Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:51, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks for creating that. I no longer have Gillies, so I'm unable to check.  I'm fairly confident with my accuracy; annoyingly I don't have the book any more so I can't double check.  That said, I'd be happy to err on the side of caution with this and for your source to be used for the year, so long as it can be trusted. Gillies can remain in place for any other information the sentence contains, should it still fit.   Cassianto Talk  17:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * My best source is the Richard Anthony Baker book - "In 1915, Arthurs and Leigh wrote "A Little of What You Fancy".....". (p. 151)    Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , Yes, I've heard of Baker - I used him on George Robey - so it's fine with me to use.  Cassianto Talk  22:07, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Here is a link to the book - I'm not going to edit a FA myself.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:42, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Why on earth not?  Cassianto Talk  06:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

"She Sits Among the Cabbages and Peas"
According to the respected music hall historian Richard Anthony Baker (in his book Old Time Variety: an illustrated history, p.190), the story that Lloyd sang a song with that title is a much-repeated myth, which is perpetuated in this article. Baker wrote that "In fact, there was no such song. It was a line in a Leslie Sarony song, "Mucking about the Garden".  Aware of the controversy, Sarony registered the composer as Q. Cumber." Can the reference be safely removed from the article? Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:04, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

The Edwardians (miniseries)
I just created a stub on the 1972-1973 UK miniseries The Edwardians. One of the episodes was about Marie Lloyd. There is currently no legacy section or cultural depictions section in this article. I always hesitate to add anything to an FA article, perhaps an editor more invested in this article might consider where content like this might exist within this article. Best.4meter4 (talk) 15:13, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Sanford and Lyons
Reaching out to those with experience with editing, approving articles relating to Music Hall artists and history for the following draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sanford_and_Lyons

Thankyou so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Victoriana2022 (talk • contribs) 03:35, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Last Performance
This is a really interesting article. Well done to all who have worked on it. I noticed the Times republished the original news article of her death (as part of the centenary of the occasion) the other day. It seemed to contradict this page's claim that her final appearance was at the Alhambra Theatre. (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nation-mourns-marie-lloyd-star-of-music-hall-w73nj5r87). I am thinking of adding some of this detail to the page in the coming days so I thought I'd pose this puzzle here beforehand.

SnowballWT (talk) 10:15, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Belle Elmore and the Music Hall Strike
Recent research by the historian Hallie Rubenhold has not turned up evidence that the Belle Elmore story is a reliable one (see https://twitter.com/HallieRubenhold/status/1654145844818452482).

Even the source cited by the article (Macqueen-Pope 'Queen of the Music Hall' refers to the story with the term 'It is said that...', suggesting this is hearsay rather than historical fact. So, whilst there is a source which can be cited, the story is gossip or hearsay. Given the claim serves to blacken the name of a murder victim, isn't really historical fact and isn't necessary for detailing Marie's role in the 1907 music hall strike, should it not be removed?

The version here isn't the one that's in Macqueen-Pope's book in any case. 137.220.109.188 (talk) 00:58, 10 May 2023 (UTC)