Talk:Grace Marguerite Hay Drummond-Hay

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hampstead or Liverpool[edit]

I don't think there is an area of Liverpool called Hampstead. MrMarmite 07:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't; I used to live there. There is a Hampstead Road in L6, near Newsham Park, which might fit the bill but until I can get to the DNB, it's got to go. --Rodhullandemu 20:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

In addition to the references in the article there are these online mentions from the Akron Library:

  • The FULTON COLLECTION / Special Collections, Akron-Summit County Public Library has "Lady Grace Drummond Hay, Graf Zeppelin passenger and journalist, 10/30/28, (Sheet # 4)." as one of the photographs in SUBSERIES VIII: BLIMPS, BOX PH-14
  • "Lady Hay, Grace Drummond Hay (Sheet # 31)." as one of the photographs from SUBSERIES XV, BOX PH-21
  • "-Lady Hay Drummond Hay, London, about airplane she had transported to England, June 14, 1933." in FOLDER 18: Correspondence-Personal-Letters to Shorty arranged chronologically.

Here are two deeplinks to Drummond-Hay photograph entries from summitmemory.org:

  • Airship - Lady Grace Drummond Hay, "Lady Grace Drummond Hay waves goodbye from the Graf Zeppelin as it takes off from Lakehurst, New Jersey.", (she waves from the map room, wind electric generator seen lower right), 30 September 1928
  • Letter - Lady Grace Drummond-Hay, 14th June, 1933, letter to Shorty Fulton, Akron Municipal Airport Manager, relating her purchase of a aeroplane at Troy, shipped to London on the SS Bremen

Here is a Channel 4 link for a documentary on airships:

  • Channel 4 - History - The Airships, October 1928 Drummond Hay was only woman among 20 passengers on first non-stop flight from Europe to USA, she radioed a daily column to New York, that kitchen was small, "became a coast-to-coast darling", four quotes, "most famous female journalist of her time."

-84user (talk) 12:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

As of Feb 2010 she doesn't have an entry in the Dictionary of National Biography. Some confusion over her internment in Manila - the article says she was released in 1945 but the Biographical Notes with Karl Henry von Wiegand's Papers [1] say he was repatriated in 1943. There's no mention of her, and there seems to be a bit of extrapolation in the article from the scant info about their internment in Time [2] "wartime Girl Friday (through Jap captivity in Manila)" ie she was his Girl Friday in the camp, though it doesn't mention when they were released or if they were released at the same time. 81.129.133.186 (talk) 17:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name[edit]

She was not Lady Grace etc. Drummond-Hay, but Lady Drummond-Hay. Lady with a first name indicates the daughter of a duke, marquis or earl, which she wasn't. She took her title from her husband. 87.79.167.125 (talk) 21:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Documentary[edit]

Correction: The documentary on BBC four was called 'Around the World by Zeppelin' and was 1 hr 23 min long. Probably the same documentary mentioned but with the name changed as the credits contain many Dutch-looking names but as I'm not sure I'm not going to change anything in the article Chardn (talk) 23:25, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name[edit]

Lady Drummond-Hay was born 12 September 1894 in Toxteth Park District in Lancashire England. She was in fact an Aviatrix having obtained her Flying Certificate on 2nd August 1930 at the Airwork School of Flying in a De Haviland Gipsy Moth.

--122.150.210.117 (talk) 05:03, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would appear you are correct on the date, but the year is 1895, not sure how that has remained wrong for so long. I have her passport (she was my great aunt) which makes this error ever more extraordinary! . Thanks MrMarmite (talk) 22:07, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Main image[edit]

Recently someone edited the main image, the sepia tone. I released the original image to the public domain, and that does not include rights to crop, rescale and recolour. I have reverted this to the original. Thanks MrMarmite (talk) 22:13, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The ownership of the copyright to a photograph (and especially of a nonexclusive print thereof) is not transferred to the owner of the print but always remains with the creator of the image (the photographer) until he/she either transfers it to another or it expires and statutorily then becomes Public Domain. At that time the photograph loses all copyright protection and may be altered, restored, be the basis of a derivative image, or anything else without restriction. The mere creation of a two dimensional scan, digital image, or photograph (i.e., a "slavish copy") also does not create a "new" copyright as there is insufficient creative content to so qualify. Therefore MrMarmite was never in a position to "release" (or not release) as PD the digital image he scanned and posted as he never was the copyright holder to begin with. It had instead already automatically become Public Domain by reason of its original copyright having expired because of the passage of time. Even if MrMarmite had been the copyright holder of this image (he wasn't) and then released it to Public Domain that would also be it as far as any further copyright protection for the image. Once an image is made PD no matter how that happens, that is not a reversible act and by definition it can not be copyrighted again. Centpacrr (talk) 04:04, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, the original photograph is mine, inherited from my great-grand-father, who took this picture of his daughter. Grace was my great-aunt. The photograph, in my opinion, is far more interesting in its original form, together with the hand written name at the bottom of it, written by the photographer. Regardless of whether there is an inherent right to modify, your opinion that the re-colouring and cropping is an improvement is just that, an opinion. I have no wish to enter an edit-war on this, so I invite comments here before any further edits are made. Thanks MrMarmite (talk) 09:17, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your feelings about the photograph but the fact that a print of it came down to you through your family still did not legally transfer the image's former copyright (if it had not already expired) to you or anyone else unless that had been done so in writing by its original holder although it would not likely ever be challenged unless you tired to enforce it against somebody else. That, however, is also a moot issue now as all of its former protection ended when its copyright expired and the image entered the Pubic Domain. That would also be the case if you (or anybody else) held an image with unexpired copyright protection and then voluntarily chose to put it in the Public Domain. Once that has been done, neither you or anybody else can place any restrictions on it because the image now belongs to the public at large. That's what "Public Domain" means. While copyrighted images may not be used for derivative works without permission from the copyright owner, PD images can be freely used for derivative works without restriction. Images in the public domain may also be reproduced photographically or artistically or used as the basis of new, interpretive works or the basis of illustrations. That's what the infobox illustration I created at the request of another editor made in the Wikipedia Graphics Lab/Photography workshop is for.
I note with interest that while you also say that you "have no wish to enter an edit-war on this, so I invite comments here before any further edits are made" that's also exactly what you did: made further edits by removing the infobox illustration. The new illustration file does not overwrite your file which still remains live on its host page and is available to be placed within the article while the derivative infobox illustration was instead uploaded as a new, separate image file. Centpacrr (talk) 15:54, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Grace Marguerite Hay Drummond-Hay. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:03, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Grace_Marguerite_Hay_Drummond-Hay&oldid=1207593529"