Talk:Ladybird, Ladybird

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Sweetpool50 in topic 2019 revision

Is it a song

edit

Is it a song? I'd understood it to be just a verse, and one with many variants and no agreed meaning. --GwydionM 19:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

I know it as a song, but it could probably be described as both a poem/nursery rhyme or song. 203.122.237.201 (talk) 00:52, 6 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Variants

edit

There are surprisingly many, suggesting several 'lines of descent'. I've added those I could find on the web. But old books of folklore would be better, if someone has access to them. --GwydionM 17:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Scottish version

edit

I've removed the Scottish version, because it was cited in another Wikipedia article, which in turn was more or less cited in this one, although it also alludes to an unnamed 1851 publication. This was a circular citation, so I had to remove it.

That said, I think I may have found the source, although it was issued in 1849 instead.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13521/13521-h/13521-h.htm#page132

If we deem this source to be reliable enough, we could perhaps reinclude it. So what do you think after reading that publication? Is it okay, or is it iffy? Shinobu (talk) 17:57, 13 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Since a source has been found it should go back.--GwydionM (talk) 18:17, 13 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

German (and other language) version(s) of the song

edit

This song is obviously not exclusively English. In fact I learnt a German version called 'Marienwurmchen' as a child. It is mentioned in the German wikipedia in the same article as for lady bird, to which I have linked at the bottom of this article. It would be great if this article could have a slightly increased scope to describe the song in the whole world rather than just in Anglophone culture. 203.122.237.201 (talk) 00:50, 6 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

words

edit

When I learnt this, it was a dripping pan? http://www.aolib.com/reader_24065_30.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.159.40 (talk) 09:04, 16 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Jane Eyre

edit

This poem is also mentioned in a scene in the garden between Jane and Rochester. Jane turns away despondent after learning Rochester plans to marry, and R, thinking Jane is looking at an insect, says "That was only a lady-clock, child, 'flying away home.'" [1] Here is a link to the quote in a public domain copy at Google Books (different edition): https://books.google.com/books?id=lSMGAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA264&lpg=PA264&dq=jane+eyre+fly+away+home&source=bl&ots=89xeCJWBzE&sig=RVXcP3MbAtcdUN8icAl5DtnBf60&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDgQ6AEwCGoVChMIsIj5xJ_4xgIVw8uACh3TGQr_#v=onepage&q=jane%20eyre%20fly%20away%20home&f=false Bhbuehler (talk) 07:32, 26 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ Bronte, Charlotte (1996). Newman, Beth (ed.). Jane Eyre. Bedford/St. Martin's. p. 249. ISBN 978-0-312-09545-1. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)

Questionable source

edit

Is the source cited for the following material a reliable one?

There were superstitious beliefs that it was unlucky to kill a ladybird, and that the verse would make them fly off.[1]

Wikipedia:Verifiability says articles should be based on "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". The source given seems to be either self-published material, which is generally not reliable per WP:SELFPUBLISH, or based on "unsubstantiated gossip, rumor, or personal opinion" (WP:QS). —Coconutporkpie (talk) 04:52, 1 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Also, the source doesn't say anything about using the rhyme to make ladybirds fly away, just that they are considered lucky. —Coconutporkpie (talk) 05:11, 1 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ Jonn Bearcat Redmond, "Superstitions of Nature" electricscotland.com

Cultural references

edit

The statement, "This section indiscriminately collects miscellaneous information. Please compress this material to remove any irrelevant or unimportant information" does not seem to apply here. Wikanon86 (talk) 06:36, 29 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

2019 revision

edit

In rewriting the article I have returned to several of the comments above and incorporated the information. I have also addressed the criticism that the article had become a mass of repetitious variants. There was enough extra material to divide the article into three sub-sections. Sweetpool50 (talk) 17:58, 13 June 2019 (UTC)Reply