Talk:Betty Crocker
Removed a section
Removed the section about the 1950 Betty Crocker Picture Cook Book as there was no photo of ++ Betty in that edition. I checked my old cookbooks and it's the 1956 edition that Betty's face is seen smiling. I will try to add that information later. Mary Ash 04:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
The two references need to be worked over
Mary, I have not made any revisions or relocation, but you should be aware:
- The hyperlink for the second "reference", http://adage.com/century/icon04.html/topic , does not work. All I get is a "Not found" error.
- A book citation, a journal citation or a hyperlink to an online website is not a "reference" (or a "note") unless it is tied to a specific word or sentence in the article by a number such as [1]. If it doesn't to that, then it is either a "Bibliography" item or an "External Links" item and should be moved to those subpages.
After you correct the hyperlink that does not work, if you want the two references to be tied to some specific words or specific sentences in the article so that they are truly "references", then please respond here and tell me where you want them to be tied to, and I will do that for you and do it in the correct reference format. If you do not want to tie them to specific words or sentences, then let me know that and I will transfer them to the "External Links" subpage for you.
I will await your reply. When you reply, all you need (as the first one to reply) is one colon (:) to indent your reply correctly and you do not need to add your name after the four tildes because the tildes automatically sign and date your posting. If someone else replies before you do and uses one colon, then as the second replier you use two colons (::). Milton Beychok 05:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Wikilinking
So you'll know what I did, I put the relevant existing article title, First Lady of the United States, into your link to First Lady, so it reads, in edit mode, [[First Lady of the United States|First Lady]]. That turns your redlink (i.e., target needs to be defined) to blue, linking to the live article.
We tend not to link common words, in phrases, such as school. The rule of thumb: ask yourself if the reader would be likely to click on the link in order to understand the usage. I did link a phrase or two.
If CZ has an Official Food Photographer, it's Hayford. Howard C. Berkowitz 05:22, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Related articles
In the article, you make the important point that Betty was both an advertising triumph, but also a contributor to a cooking style. Might I suggest you put, under Subtopics, some of the dishes that you most associate with her? We can certainly have articles and recipes for them as new articles.
Of course, there's a whole area of advertising icons of which she was an early exemplar. Perhaps someone might do the AFLAC duck, Geico gecko, Geico cavemen, etc.
There is a recipe template, which Hayford can explain better than I — I tend to write more in the sense of general approaches to technique, such as red-stewing. Howard C. Berkowitz 08:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Added a Screenshot I Took Showing the Official Portraits of Betty Crocker
I do believe it's considered fair use as I took a screenshot of Betty Crocker and uploaded it with the copyright to General Mills. Using the screenshot I took probably is copyrighted by me since I created the image, but I am not a copyright lawyer. If anyone wants to edit the copyright status or comment please do so. I do believe this is fair use as Citizendium is a nonprofit encyclopedia. What do you all think?
Mary Ash 14:45, 26 July 2010 (UTC)Mary Ash
- As the originator of this comment you do not need to indent with any colons at all. As the first replier to this comment, I indented with one colon. If someone else replies or remarks on this comment after me, he/she will use two colons (even if it is you, saying thanks).
- I agree that your screenshot is probably okay as fair use. But you, as the one who took the screenshot, are definitely not the copyright holder. Regards, Milton Beychok 15:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Really good new choice of image
The sequence of official portraits might well be useful in other articles on American culture, fashion, etc. Howard C. Berkowitz 15:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you! I was trying to learn how you all upload photos or graphics here. Worked fine. This morning I created a screenshot from the General Mills PDF document about Crocker. Thanks again for the encouragement. :-)
- Mary Ash 15:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
®
Companies like Kleenex and Coca-Cola would like The New York Times and Citizendium and everyone else in the world to always use the ® thingee every time their wonderful products are mentioned in any printed context but, I fear, such is not the way of the actual world. The NYT Manual of Style says, on page 209, anent trademarks "Names of products and processes that are patented and are the exclusive property of an individual of company are capitalized: Coca-Cola and (Coke), Formica, Frigidaire, etc. etc." It does not use the ® in any of its stories -- I've just done a search and their occasional use of "Betty Crocker" over the years always has it in caps but never with a ®. In 2005 the rather eccentric, and certainly contentious, science-fiction author Harlan Ellison trademarked his name and loudly insisted that everyone in the world now use "Harlan Ellison®" whenever he was mentioned and threatened to sue anyone who didn't. The NYT has certainly not listened to Harlan's demand. For a brief period of time, as I recall, Locus, The Magazine of Science Fiction, did write his name that way, but after a while sanity prevailed and now poor old Harlan is just Harlan without the ® in their pages. I've just checked Time magazine, and they don't use the ® for either Betty or Harlan either.... Hayford Peirce 17:19, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Removed Comma Splice
Removed comma splice from a sentence. Mary Ash 01:35, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- That is grammatically wrong and I have restored it. From page 206 of the NYT Manual of Style: that, which. That is preferred in restrictive clauses: The university that he admires most is Harvard. In nonrestrictive clause, which is mandatory: Harvard, which is not his alma mater, is first in his affections. Nonrestrictive clauses have commas around them; restrictive clauses do not. From The Elements of Grammar, by Elizabeth Shertzer: A phrase that is essential to the meaning of the sentence is called restrictive. A phrase that is actually parenthetical comment is called nonrestrictive and is usually set off by commas. Since you are using "which" in this sentence, it is a non-restrictive clause and needs a comma. Hayford Peirce 02:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)