Talk:Sarah Rector

Neutrality
She sounds like she could be a notable figure, but this article was just created today (February 7) and all of its sources are either blogs or Black History Month promotional material. Surely we can find some other sources for her.-RomeW (talk) 08:02, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Google doesn't give me any scholarly sources or material that would get used by Black History Month promoters. We need a bit more depth in the source material.-RomeW (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As the author of this entry, I dispute that generalization about the sources. Some of those blogs give actual images of newspaper articles about Rector. I used those as much as possible. Daniel the Monk (talk) 04:47, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Why is the Neutrality in Question?
I have noticed that articles on Wikipedia about African Americans seem to get tagged with the notice of "neutrality of this article is disputed". I think that this labeling and that of any other article should be done with great caution and without prejudice. Before we hastily dispute an article, we should ourselves look at the factual basis and see if the article can be ENHANCED. Wikipedia is meant to share information, not to censor it. A cursory search on Google Books and even Google News which allow customized searches easily provide historical records on this person. Two sources I found right away date from 1915.
 * https://books.google.com/books?id=JFoEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA292&dq=sarah+rector&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiJ1JHDvefKAhUD1mMKHUkKDzgQ6AEIKDAC#v=onepage&q=sarah%20rector&f=false


 * https://books.google.com/books?id=_OAcAQAAMAAJ&pg=PP18&dq=sarah+rector&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjDgtXMvefKAhUN1GMKHTxKDz04ChDoAQhBMAc#v=onepage&q=sarah%20rector&f=false

Instead of immediately questioning the neutrality of the article, I think the more prudent and non-prejudicial action would be to improve it. In fact I would encourage an "Improve before Disputing" practice, which will help Wikipedia more well rounded. Thus we could use the sources above or any of the other historical material to improve the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xamalek (talk • contribs) 06:10, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Don't assume I flagged this out of malice. I flagged it as a call to action, so that others (like you, if you feel inclined) can improve the article with other sources, because if it doesn't get flagged, the article may stay unnoticed and thus unimproved. I already explained my reasoning as to why I flagged the article, and I stated quite clearly she seems to be a notable figure. I would help improve it but I don't know too much about Sarah Rector, and Google wasn't kind to me when I looked.


 * I'm not going to comment on the other articles on African Americans because I don't know their situation, but at least I can say when I flagged this article I had no ill will.-RomeW (talk) 03:43, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Accepted that no ill will was intended, but flagging it gives the impression of a 'whitewash' and should only be undertaken when the subject is (especially afro-american topics) disputed and there is controversy. Robco311 (talk) 10:21, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Politics has nothing to do with determining neutrality. The fact of the matter is, these sources are *all* "Black History Month"-type sources. They're biased. Surely we can do better than that.-RomeW (talk) 04:18, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The reality of life here is that when a white person speaks of black culture, it seems best NOT to assume that he or she is not speaking politically. I would guess that the same might be true in Brixton. I find it curious that you did not take the route of "improve", which to my mind would be best, instead of bringing up the issue of neutrality, and, as the author, would be welcome. I knew nothing of Rector previously, and thought her life worth documenting for wider knowledge. This seemed especially useful as documenting the lives of minorities has the burden of their having generally been ignored by the wider society of their day. Given that, your "surely" seems a bit presumptuous; but you have achieved the goal of bringing attention to the entry. Daniel the Monk (talk) 05:05, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * First of all, why do you assume that because I questioned this article's neutrality that I must be a racist (or even simply a white guy)? Frankly, that's a bit presumptuous yourself. Secondly, I looked for other sources on Google and I couldn't find them, so I hope by tagging this article others can find the sources themselves. Truth is, the only sources for this article are Wordpress blogs, a magazine article from the NAACP and the book from Tonya Bolden, who has written quite a bit on black history and seems interested in promoting it. Not that there is anything wrong with promoting black history, but you have to understand that comes with its own bias (just like those who promote white history or Latino history, etc., have their own biases). In other words, people like Stacey Patton and Bolden have a vested interest in ensuring that Rector is known as an important figure, and the possibility remains that they may be elevating her status greater than it actually was. Having seen through the biases, I tend to think Rector really *is* an important figure who should be noted and included on Wikipedia, but I want to do better than quoting from black history activists. Rector lived until 1967 and her actions were important in her day, yet this article contains not a single primary source or even a contemporaneous profile of her, even on her deathbed. I like to believe those sources exist, somewhere. I'd also like to believe Rector must be covered in a scholarly journal somewhere.
 * If you happen to have Bolden's book (I do not), I would suggest looking up her sources and using them here (where available). If we can get even a few primary sources for Rector, then we can have a much more complete picture of who Rector was.-RomeW (talk) 09:28, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I would like to repeat what I said earlier (1)There are sources in Google Books which date back a many decades which reference this person. There are also a few newspaper articles too. (2) We should strive to improve the article and bring it into conformance with such publicly available knowledge. (3)The story is certainly an interesting one.
 * That a certain group of editors is responding to questions of neutrality by race-baiting and intimidating anyone who disagrees with them leaves no doubt as to the article's political character and lack of neutrality. And black supremacists are completely unreliable sources. 2604:2000:1580:425C:F022:48A1:34C7:F44A (talk) 10:52, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

How many acres?
Going by the preceding texts, it would seem that Sarah Rector was entitled to 40 acres:
 * Dawes Act:
 * a head of family would receive a grant of 160 acre, a single person or orphan over 18 years of age would receive a grant of 80 acre, and persons under the age of 18 would receive 40 acre each
 * The Curtis Act of 1898 amended the Dawes Act to extend its provisions to the Five Civilized Tribes;
 * Cherokee freedmen controversy:
 * The treaty also set aside a large tract of land for Freedmen to settle, with 160 acres for each head of household (article 4)
 * 1866 Treaty: Muscogee freedmen count as Muscogee
 * 1887 Dawes: Indian [excluding Muscogee and other 1866 tribes] minors entitled to 40 acres
 * 1898 Curtis: Muscogee minors entitled to 40 acres

In which case, the cited blog that says she was entitled to 160 acres would be wrong — unless her parents and siblings were dead and she had inherited all of her father's 160 acres. Some sources say her younger brother Manny also had a plot with oil on it. jnestorius(talk) 13:38, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. 💵Money💵emoji💵 💸 15:17, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

The Richest Black Girl in America
Also see the article The Richest Black Girl in America by Lauren N. Henley. This Wikipedia article barely mentions what her white guardians did to her, or how much they embezzled from her.

Jeffrey Walton (talk) 19:46, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Additional images of Sarah Rector?
The Black Archives of Mid-America is in contact with Sarah Rector's family, who says many photos of Sarah Rector as a child may not actually be photos of her. The Black Archives of Mid-America would appreciate if more images could be uploaded to this article, if anyone happens to have additional photos of Sarah Rector. Chrysanthemum123 (talk) 17:34, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
 * How about this image. Looks to me as if it is public domain. You'll also note the accompanying biography contains lots of details not yet in the Wikipedia article. Thanks for publicizing your efforts once again.--Ipigott (talk) 12:53, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
 * In connection with the request above for a photo of the Rector Mansion, this article includes a historic photo as well as further details of her biography. At the very least, it seems to me that details of her marriages and married names should be included.--Ipigott (talk) 13:12, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Looks like both those images are actually not her photos (and the one with the pigtails is currently on the article). See https://newsantafetrailer.blogspot.com/2019/11/richest-black-girl-in-america.html and https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/09/03/sarah-rector-richest-black-girl/. Llightex (talk) 13:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Photographs
I strongly suggest that the images illustrating this article be edited to appear with a caption stating that while these photos have been widely circulated and purported to be Sarah Rector, the family denies that they depict her. The following articles and a blog post include a photo provided by relatives. I am not sure whether copyright issues would prevent that photo being used on Wikipedia. https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/09/03/sarah-rector-richest-black-girl/ https://martincitytelegraph.com/2020/01/19/who-was-the-real-sarah-rector-the-richest-black-girl-in-america/ https://newsantafetrailer.blogspot.com/2019/11/richest-black-girl-in-america.html 11 Arlington (talk) 01:51, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Photo is Callie House - not Sarah Rector
the photo of the adult woman is Callie House of the Ex-Slave Mutual Relief, Bounty & Pension Association. See the Prologue Magazine article in the National Archives Caution.mike (talk) 16:18, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Her mother
I don't know if it's some editing mistake or what, but the sentence about her mother makes no sense whatsoever. Below is the excerpt

Sarah's father Joseph was the son of John Rector, a Creek Freedman. John Rector's father, Benjamin McQueen, was enslaved by Reilly Grayson, who was a Creek Indian. John Rector's mother Mollie McQueen was the Muscogee Opothleyahola, who fought in the Seminole Wars and split with the tribe, moving his followers to Kansas 2601:40A:8300:3900:40B2:A3C5:20CC:1127 (talk) 02:58, 16 February 2024 (UTC)