Talk:Pamela Colman Smith

Mother's Death
I'm not sure it could be correct that her mother died when she was 10, as the passenger list of the Alleghany arriving in New York from Kingston 30 Oct 1895 lists Miss Pamela Smith, age 17, with Mrs. Charles Smith, age 38. Tarchon 05:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Also note the arrival of the Alene in New York from Kingston on 4 Oct 1893 with Corinne Smith (45) and Pamela Smith (15). In March 1897 she made the same voyage on the Alleghany again with her father Charles E. Smith (age 50), which could bracket the date of Corinne Smith's death. There's also a London-NY voyage on the Mesaba dated 22 Sept. 1906 under the full name "Pamela Colman Smith" (noted as "American Citizen" here as in previous cases) Tarchon 05:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Other sources list her mother has having died in 1896. Perhaps this should be provisionally included in the article, in lieu of the clearly incorrect date of 1888?Valli Nagy 20:59, 28 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ValliNagy (talk • contribs)

OR
I'm being very restrained by not just deleting the last paragraph. It consists almost entirely of speculation about what is "likely", "unlikely", "doubtful", and so on, written in a smug and informal tone (I note the comment about whether Wait would "hang out" in Smith's studio), none of which are sourced, and which add up to a systematic and inappropriate campaign to maximise the importance of Smith's contribution to the the tarot deck and minimise Waite's. It's arguing a point of view, not presenting facts.

Now, it happens that the "Smith was the author and Waite wasn't" point of view is a popular one, and the fact that lots of people do think that is something we should report. But it remains a point of view, not the only one and not a well-supported one. We shouldn't present an original argument for it as objective fact. 216.75.188.95 (talk) 21:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree. It's disturbing to see that sort of unsupported speculation in a Wiki entry: "it is likely" "it appears" "it is not unlikely" and meaningless praise: "the talented and intuitive Smith" "This is a short period of time for an artist to complete some 80 pictures" and so forth. 76.10.135.246 (talk) 21:38, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Non-tarot work
US Games has recently published a centennial biography of PCS. There is a review of it here http://janetboyer.com/Pamela_Colman_Smith_Commemorative_Set.html I think more of her work should be included in this article. She did other things besides that tarot deck.Smiloid (talk) 08:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * sources seem to indicate that the original plates of her tarot deck images were destroyed in ww2. the commemorative set seems to say they are reproduced from the originals. anyone who has seen the various editions of this deck over the years knows that the line reproduction is second rate, a copy of a copy. if the new set is somehow better, that would be really big news for art lovers and historians. no one has commented yet on this, but most tarot fans arent serious art critics. if anyone can get sourcing on this, that would be great.(Mercurywoodrose)76.232.11.11 (talk) 03:43, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Personal Life?
No mention is made anywhere of her Personal Life. Didn't she have one? Female middle class members of the Art world in the 1900s were quite well-placed to have them. Nuttyskin (talk) 15:53, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pamela Colman Smith. 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/20060721004631/http://www.manteia-online.dk/wst-ipcs/wst-ipcs.pdf to http://www.manteia-online.dk/wst-ipcs/wst-ipcs.pdf
 * Added tag to http://home.comcast.net/~pamela-c-smith/home.html

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) 00:23, 7 December 2017 (UTC)