Talk:Laura Branigan

DOB again

I grew up with Laura Branigan in Armonk, NY. We were in the same classes in elementary school (SS John & Mary) and in high school (Byram Hills). We were born in 1952. We graduated high school in 1970. If fans simply checked her home town records and her school records, they would know she was born in 1952 and was raised in Armonk, NY. The 1957 birth year was used for her career. Lots of celebrities have said they were younger for their careers. But I would think biographers would prefer to stipulate the truth. Maybe it doesn't matter. Personally, I don't really care. I'm just saying 1957 is incorrect. It's simply ignorance of the facts. Why those who insist it's true do not do their research is beyond me. Oh well. smh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth1952 (talk • contribs) 23:56, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Again, Wikipedia can only summarize what is given by sources. Newspapers disagree with you. Lots of newspapers. Truth has to be proven from references. See the rest of this talk page and the two Archives. Unless you have something new to add to this, we have spun these wheels already. Devilmanozzy (talk) 10:21, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

I would point toward wp:Pillars as a good read. I don't think the point of WP is clear, based on these continued posts about "knowing" and "truth". WP cannot, has not, and will not be able to determine truth or falsehood. It can only summarize, as it has here, the contents of the published sources. Here, we have many generally reliable sources using the (it appears erroneous) date. Even if every single interested editor were to suddenly agree that the the published sources were, in fact, wrong, it would not matter: WP contains the footnote that a minority of the wp:RS give other dates, and that individuals with personal knowledge (primary sources) give other dates. This is in keeping with the purpose of WP: to summarize in editors own words the content of the generally reliable sources.Shajure (talk) 00:17, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

I just want you to see some pictures I had from people in Armonk, who were classmates with Laura at SS John and Mary school in Chappaqua. Laura Branigan picture from Armonk 1958. She is 6 years old. Next is Laura and best friend Geri. From Armonk about 1963-64 Laura and Geri in Armonk about 1963-64. Next is from 1962 and SS John & Mary 5th grade Laura 1962, SS John & Mary school 5th grade, Chappaqua I have much, much more in my Laura collection. I will not show them though this pictures will probably be considered as fakes and fabricated in photoshop. But I think or know the nickname Truth1952 can verify them, though she grew up with Laura. Wiki experts, have you solved the problem with Billy's birth year? In Laura's biography it is said she was child 4th of 5. If you continue to give Billy birth year 1957, then Laura is younger than Billy. Isn't it easier to admit you are wrong and make the changes so it looks trustful in your "professional" wiki. Wiki has now the fenomen of 2 siblings born the same year of 1957. It looks crazy and ridiculous. You are supposed to be the elite of all contributors in this subject, but you can't read, understand and definitely you are not able to think logical and draw conclusions. To 2Truth1952, I understand you didn't came back and tried to defend yourself against Laura's so called experts. I am sure you know who I am after my visit in your Facebook group. If you like, please contact me at my Facebook, maybe we can work out something together to end this stupid game from those pro1957.--Born53 swe (talk) 12:08, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

I would point toward wp:Pillars as a good read. I don't think the point of WP is clear, based on these continued posts about "knowing" and "truth". WP cannot, has not, and will not be able to determine truth or falsehood. It can only summarize, as it has here, the contents of the published sources. Here, we have many generally reliable sources using the (it appears erroneous) date. Even if every single interested editor were to suddenly agree that the the published sources were, in fact, wrong, it would not matter: WP contains the footnote that a minority of the wp:RS give other dates, and that individuals with personal knowledge (primary sources) give other dates. This is in keeping with the purpose of WP: to summarize in editors own words the content of the generally reliable sources.Shajure (talk) 02:15, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

And I would point out again and also I demand an answer. I don't care about Laura's birth year, but Which year was Billy Branigan born? Was it 1957 as his birth announce says from 1957, or when was it? The answer is also the indication about Laura. And if Laura was born 1957, when did she attend high school? I have many emails from different people, but this came from Antoinette Morales, Town clerk in Mount Kisco. She wrote

"Sir, We have no knowledge of which newspaper a birth announcement would have appeared in 1952. The birth record is the ultimate record of proof but you are not interested in the birth record nor are you eligible to request one. The only other suggestion I have to make your case is that in Wikipedia, it says she attended Byram Lake High School from 1966-1970. If she were born in 1957, then she would have been 9 years of age in high school. Typically, a first year high school student is anywhere from 13 to 14 years of age which supports the birth year being 1952. I hope this helps. Good luck, Antoinette Morales, Staff Assistant Finance, Deputy Registrar, Mount Kisco" I answered her "It is with sadness I'll let you know it is not enough. You see, we are many who has been in the same direction to have wikipedia to read, think and draw conclusions of the subject. I had an email from wikipedia's Nigel P. yesterday which said "it is nothing they will take note of that Laura and Billy Branigan has the same birth year, 1957. It is still all information from the press release written by Laura's management in August 2004 which is the only truth". So if I understand Nigel P correct, not even a birth record would help, though it is still Kathy Golik's press release from August 2004 which is ruling everything. And that means it is only Kathy Golik who can change Laura's birth year and birthplace? And she stated August 15 that Laura was born 1957 in Brewster! --Born53 swe (talk) 14:57, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

wp:Pillars - "have wikipedia to read, think and draw conclusions" - WP does not think, read, or draw conclusions. The published wp:rs do that. WP editors ONLY reword (thus: editors, not authors) that content in their own words. Not their thoughts. Not their conclusions. I'll continue to reply to each of these with key pointers, so that editors will not be confused by this continuing wp:POV push. It does not matter what I/we/you/they think, feel, know, believe, or conclude. It matters only what is in the published, wp:RS.Shajure (talk) 16:58, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

also wp:tldr (edit: Wikipedia:Too long; didn't read. All the chatter among wp:primary sources is interesting but has nothing to do with WP articles. Please remain focused on the content of the wp:RS, and how it should be presented in the article. For all those other things, I would point to the other thousands or millions of web sites as possible publication sites.Shajure (talk) 17:06, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

For God sake, seek help, you need it!--Born53 swe (talk) 12:08, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Suggest reading wp:NPA, wp:pillarsShajure (talk) 15:18, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Laura Branigan was born July 3, 1952. SSN:093-98-XXXX.--Born53 swe (talk) 17:59, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

I continue to agree wholeheartedly. Sadly, most of the wp:RS do not, and thus the article reflects the 1957 date most often given there, with a note about the differing wp:RS and primary sources.Shajure (talk) 00:18, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

For those who are still interested, Born53 swe has posted Laura Branigan's Social Security application on his web site: https://se.pinterest.com/pin/204913851775644779/
Yeah, I know "Wikipedia cannot accept scans on fan sites as we have no way of verifying the authenticity of such uploads". Anyway, the scan does indicate a birthdate of 3rd July 1952 and also gives her birthplace as Manhattan, NYC (not Brewster, NY). I've had a look at the Manhattan Birth Index for 1952, and there is a record of a "BRANIGAN, Female" being born there on that date. No first name listed, unfortunately. Anyway, it's an interesting piece of the puzzle. Muzilon (talk) 07:13, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

There really isn't any "puzzle" - except the question of how Wikipedia should set out biographical information when there is substantial evidence (and there is no doubt that there is substantial evidence) that the details reported in normally reliable sources are, for whatever reason, wrong. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:39, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

That isn't a puzzle at all, it is covered thoroughly in the WP guidance documents. WP cannot, never has, never will be able to determine truth. Thus, we are called "editors" not "authors"... we rewrite in our own words, the published data that meets wp:RS, and other guidance. That is what WP is for. There are thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions of other pages on the web that are for other purposes. I observe that WP is about number 6 most-visited site on the web. None of the encyclopedic sites that pursue truth are even close. The evidence is set out in the article. The readers can draw their own conclusions. Idly: the current President of the US has had his birth certificate published, verified by many people and organizations, and there is *still* a huge wrangle about the basic facts.Shajure (talk) 21:56, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

To the OP of this section - the best course of action at this point, based on what these editors are saying, is for you to get a local newspaper or two, a daily newspaper and or reputable monthly magazine, to do a story on Branigan, and include the debate about her DOB as part of the article. 2601:241:8102:221C:2DA1:6BD6:5697:3EBF (talk) 12:47, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Heh heh, it looks like people on Twitter are questioning the authenticity of that Social Security form already. Surely some enterprising journalist could get a court order to obtain her NY birth/death certificate? Muzilon (talk) 04:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Sourcing issues, verification issues, factual accuracy issues

This article has some serious sourcing issues which affect the factual accuracy of the following sub-sections: "Early years" and "Height of her career" - Sources contradict one another, some don't verify the content, some are unreliable and many paragraphs are completely unsourced. Reliable sources are required so that this content can be verified.-- Isaidnoway (talk) 00:18, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
First sentence in "Early years:

• Branigan was born in Brewster, New York - sources used: IMDb and CNN.

IMBb is generally considered unreliable - says she was born in Brewster, CNN says - Growing up in Brewster, doesn't say she was born there, and contradicts the first sentence in 2nd paragraph which says - Growing up in Armonk, New York.

• Kathleen O'Hare Branigan (1921-2006) - source used: Aimoo, a discussion forum, seriously??, we're using a discussion forum for a reliable source.
• James Branigan, Sr. (1914-1984), an account executive and mutual funds broker, who later separated. - no source

Second sentence in "Early years":

• Her younger brother Billy Branigan was born on February 28, 1957. - source used: Patent Trader, March 14, 1957 (newspaper birth announcement) Y

Birth announcement says: A son to Mr. and Mrs. James H. Branigan of Armonk, February 28. No mention of what the son's name is. Source fails verification

Third sentence in "Early years":

• She had two older brothers, James, Jr. "Jim" (1945–91) and Mark; and an elder sister, Susan. - source used: NYT/AP obituary.

What the source says: She is survived by her mother, Kathleen, who lived with her in East Quogue; two brothers, Mark and Billy, both of Manhattan; and a sister, Susan, of Connecticut - source doesn't even mention James, Jr. "Jim" (1945–91), nor does it says anything about brothers/sister being older. Y

Fourth sentence in "Early years":

• Branigan's maternal grandparents were William O'Hare, Jr. (son of William John O'Hare and Agnes B. O'Connor) and Mary Conway (daughter of Francis J. Conway and Mary Teresa McGuiness); all of them were Irish. - source used: Ethnicelebs

Source appears to be user-submitted, which would make it unreliable and their site says: Although we may vet information to ensure its accuracy, we make no assurances that all information on our Site is accurate.

Second paragraph, first sentence in "Early years":

• Growing up in Armonk, New York, Branigan attended Byram Hills High School in 1966-1970 - source used: Byram Hills School District newsletter

What the source says to verify this content - ...Laura Branigan, BHHS class of 1970... - no mention of where she grew up or years attended, second half of that sentence is sourced and verified.

Second paragraph, second sentence in "Early years":

• In 1970-1972 she attended the American Academy of Dramatic Arts in New York City, - sourced used: Encyclopedia.com

What the source says - After graduating from high school in 1975, Branigan enrolled at the American Academy of Dramatic Arts in New York City...

Second paragraph, rest of second sentence in "Early years":

• working as a waitress until in 1972 she met acoustic guitarist Walker Daniels and his future wife Sharon Storm and acoustic guitarist Chris Van Cleave, forming the folk-rock band Meadow - source used: Vancleavemusic

source does not say anything about her working as a waitress

Second paragraph, last three sentences in that paragraph in "Early years":

• The record was not properly promoted and never re-released. The band broke up, after which Walker Daniels committed suicide. Branigan preferred not to discuss her involvement with Meadow publicly. - no source

Third paragraph, single sentence in "Early years":

• During the years after Meadow broke up, Branigan had various jobs, including a stint as one of Leonard Cohen's backup singers for his European tour in April–August 1976. - no source

Fourth paragraph, first sentence in "Early years":

• In December 1978 after meeting him at a party in Manhattan, New York, earlier in the year - source used - People

What the source says - As a 24-year-old in 1981, when she met Kruteck at a Manhattan party, Branigan was on the way up.

Fourth paragraph, rest of the first sentence in "Early years":

• Branigan married Larry Ross Kruteck (1936-1996), a lawyer 20 years her senior, who died of colon cancer on June 15, 1996. sources used: CNN and People

Neither source lists Kruteck's date of birth as 1936 and neither source lists June 15 as the day he passed away, they both just state 1996.

The remaining five paragraphs in that section "Early years": Not sourced
"Height of her career section": Entire section is not sourced except for three YouTube videos.

Welcome to the show! Having troubles with Laura's biography and timeline? Don't worry, your questions will probably be answered by contributors who knows everything about Laura. I call them wiki experts. I thought I knew quite much about Laura, but according to wiki experts my sources and references were lies and fabricated in photoshop. So everything were deleted. Strange, though both Encyclopedia Britannica and Association Press, AP, are having exactly the same and they are very impressed over all reliable documentation over Laura. AP is also checking my sources as this is written, though they will rewrite Laura's obituary. Replacing 1957 and Brewster with 1952 and Mount Kisco.Ciao from Sweden!--Born53 swe (talk) 19:24, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

• Please see WP:SOFIXIT. I am assuming before creating such a detailed list, this talk page discussions and those in the archives have been read. I am going to conduct an experiment to the article as a result of this list. I am choosing the ones I have disliked having in the content on the basis that notability is not inherited. We shall see... Fylbecatulous talk 12:48, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

This is one of my favorites. It is so damn funny so comments are not needed. "In 1970-1972 she attended the American Academy of Dramatic Arts in New York City, - sourced used: Encyclopedia.com

What the source says - After graduating from high school in 1975, Branigan enrolled at the American Academy of Dramatic Arts in New York City.... Have you ever tought of the Encyclopedia is wrong? Have you thought of checking the academy's homepage? If you do that you'll find "Laura Branigan, Class of 1972". My source and references to the academy was deleted by people on this talk-page. They were fake and fabricated it was said. Could it have been Laura's little brother Billy who graduated from Byram Hills high school in Armonk, June 1975? Oh dear, if Billy was born 1957, then it was he who graduteded in 1975. Right or wrong? Time to leave, waiting for my contact person at AP in New York to see the corrections or a rewritten obituary. Ciao from Sweden--Born53 swe (talk) 17:05, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

FYI! I am leaving Wikipedia for a better site which let me make all changes I want to do about Laura. Her true birth info with her biography and timeline will at last be correct. All my sources and references which were deleted will be back and shown again. Sometimes life is good! And good luck with Laura's wiki.--Born53 swe (talk) 11:54, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

DOB issue yet again

The Associated Press has determined she was born in 1952 and corrected the 2004 obituary. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/4ce78d41c83540e2b9b6b6b34a592158/correction-laura-branigan-obituary Should Wikipedia follow the AP's example? --Orat Perman (talk) 22:32, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

With some trepidation, I have updated the "disputed birthdate" footnote to include the recent Associated Press and Encyclopedia Britannica articles. We can't really ignore the existence of these two major sources, whether or not we like them or agree with them. Muzilon (talk) 03:38, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

It would be interesting to see what that research actually is and what it amounts to? Karst (talk) 12:08, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

"After being contacted recently by one of Branigan's fans, however, the AP conducted a thorough review...". It's probably obvious who that person is... but that shouldn't stop us referring to those sources. As I think I've said all along, I'd favour the opening sentence stating "...1952 or 1957", retaining the footnote - as is the case in many other articles on popular performers. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:18, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Ok. Caught up with that one and found the WP:OR material. As someone who has not been involved in the pervious disputes, I would favour inserting 1952 while retaining the footnote, based on the Associated Press revision. If all obits are reliant on the press-release from management then that also makes it an unreliable source really. Karst (talk) 12:42, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes. AP is creditable. Need to reconsider the location and date at birth. There are too many sources disagreeing with the two sources, but with AP's they are actually noting the correction and stating why. Devilmanozzy (talk) 03:19, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Is there is now a consensus to include 1952 in the lead? If so, it would probably be helpful to agree any changes to the wording, and that of any revised footnote. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:31, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps do an RFC and ping some of the previous contributors to get broader consensus? It might get to a situation where 1952 is slotted in and it gets reverted if that is not done. The footnote can then simply refer back to RfC. IMHO the 1954-1955 references should be removed - these are both local newspapers. I would consider the AP amendment more reliable. Karst (talk) 10:41, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

AP is "A" source and it has to be noted that other sources disagree. I say switch it to 1952 being the likely date and 1957 still being the common answer. One reference doesn't make all the rest irrelevant. It is the common birthdate and AP could still get it wrong. However AP is the strongest and freshest reference. A new RFC might be a good idea. Devilmanozzy (talk) 18:56, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

AP's obituary has been quoted as their source by several other sites etc that have been used as sources for 1957, so since AP has changed the year of birth to 1952, all other sources who's story was based on the obituary have also changed the year of birth... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 19:16, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Some got it via Laura's management directly, and even with all things considered journalism is a paper by paper issue. If the reference didn't say AP was a source, they are still standing by the printing. Anyways, like said the old date is the known date. So it needs to be acknowledged. Also, the management for Laura are still (for now) standing by her date of birth being 1957. So it ain't going away. Wikipedia doesn't go by official websites, but it needs to be acknowledged. AP disagreeing with Laura's management is a important thing that has to be addressed. Devilmanozzy (talk) 21:25, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

A) How would you know that they got it from Laura's management directly, and B) why did Laura's management tell them Laura was born in 1957, when all available evidence now shows that the correct year of birth is 1952? - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 21:30, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

I'll admit it I don't understand what you are asking. I assume that Laura's Management will stick to their story in their Obituary, as they have no reason to change. As for AP, they directly noted they got their original information from Laura's Management. " When the pop singer Laura Branigan died, The Associated Press, relying on information from her management company, reported in an obituary on Aug. 28, 2004, that she was 47 and had been born on July 3, 1957." I am agreeing because AP is both a respected references and that they explained their changes in public. Those things matter. Devilmanozzy (talk) 03:10, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

In any event, I'm not sure we need multiple sources citing the exact same AP press release, which is what now appears to be happening in the "disputed birthdate" footnote. WP:CITEOVERKILL Muzilon (talk) 02:13, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

I'd go with AP, then for the 1957 date use a reference like The telegraph or BBC News since the previous reference was itself a re-report of AP story. Also, two dates for the 1954-1955 date is also a bit much. Devilmanozzy (talk) 03:37, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Birth Year

AP did a corrected Obit today 2/17/2017 http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBIT_BRANIGANCORRECTIVE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-02-17-11-34-00

Based on that I have updated the birth year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.250.75.112 (talk • contribs) 00:36, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

References

There is no rush. I've reverted you, prior to further consideration by editors on this page. Personally I favour giving precedence to the 1952 birth date now, but other editors may have different opinions. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:02, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

I did read the note & read the lengthy debate LOL but I thought that was because there was still doubt. I was in shock to look at AP breaking news & see a Laura Obit. Then saw AP seeming to have a debate within itself like the one on Wiki LOL.

Would not have corrected it otherwise but thought the AP doing a revised Obit 12 1/2 years later was a point to update the page.

Also for a point in the Wiki Page in Early years it states Branigan attended Byram Hills High School in 1966 to 1970 If she was born in 1957 she was in High School at 9 years old?

1 other small point. While this is unverifiable for Wiki editing , when Gloria came out in 1982 I do remember her being referred to as 30 years old. Same as when Bonnie Tyler was big in 1983 it was known she was 32 years old. Later on her DOB became 1953. It took years but now 1951 is the accepted date.

Maybe it is time for all those who told I was a liar with fabricated pictures and articles to apologize? So many hard words from contributors that I wasn't trustful or reliable in my research. Yes, it was I who contacted AP late summer 2016. They were not interested making chances though their own information and sources were accurate, they told me. But after 65 emails with details from my research they gave up and changed their mind. I told them I wanted to read the correction, but they said no. I couldn't do anything. (I have the emails in my research). So after 3 years of research and struggling I think I can say...I won over AP, Wikipedia, IMDb (they let me do the corrections I wanted, and after that they closed and protected her biography. It is only I who can make changes.) Swedish papers were in contact with me, they wanted to see my research. People in Armonk, Laura's former friends, neighbours, classmates, etc, has sent me congratulations for my work. They said that Laura is back again. Thanks to me! People in Armonk stood by my side and also confirmed my research as true, when AP asked them. They also invited me to be a member if their Facebook group "You know you from Armonk". As a Swede it was their way to show their appreciation to me. If you are interested, you can watch my research. Some chapters are finished and has been ended. Laura Branigan Encyclopedia. She was born 3 July, 1952 in Mt Kisco, NY I think you will enjoy it.--Born53 swe (talk) 17:25, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

@Born53 swe: Why does her Social Security application say she was born in Manhattan (not Mt Kisco)? There is evidence from the Manhattan Birth Index to support this, as I mentioned above. Muzilon (talk) 22:55, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

I had a conversation about this with a lady who knew Laura from the 70's. I have never involved her in my search, but I can do it now. From my emails with Rolle Gere, October 2016.. Rolle Gere <zingarri@gmail.com>

2016-10-03 Manhattan's a better read than Mt. Kisco! So you mean Manhattan, New York is correct? People from Armonk said to me... hmmm sure of that? So it is Manhattan? StigP No. NOT Manhattan. It sounds hip & sexy! She didn't want to say Mount Kisco. A teenager telling a lie. ®olle Not born in Manhattan !!!! Period. Paragraph. ®olle Laura was born: City: Mt. Kisco County: Westchester But you already know this. ®olle . Are we agreed about Mt Kisco? StigP . This is her last contact with me. She was very furious when I still asked about NY or Mt. Kisco. This answer ended all.. Enough! You know she was born in Mount Kisco !!!! I wouldn't read too much into her writing Manhattan. However If it's desperately important to you find an expert online. Good luck & good bye. ®olle. I was later told that Laura hated to say Mount Kisco. It was more cool, hip, etc. by saying New York. I decided to trust her, though she knew Laura. And Mt Kisco hasn't been denied from the Branigan's who still are alive. A lady from Armonk has offered to help me in my search for Laura's birth announcements. She is a former librarian at The New York Public Library. She has access to the archives and knows where to look. The paper we are looking after is on microfilm. I can only hope and pray she will find something. That would end all discussions about Laura Branigan. That's all I have, hope you are satisfied. Though I have ended writing in Wikipedia, this was just for me a "one time" jump in. Now it is up to wikipedia to handle it like you want. To be honest, wiki doesn't interest me. I have my own Laura wiki, supported from Los Angeles.--Born53 swe (talk) 12:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, the NYC Birth Indexes do record that a girl named Branigan was born in Manhattan on 3rd July 1952. If this isn't Laura, then it's a remarkable coincidence. Muzilon (talk) 13:55, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Wow, I am speechless! You have found something real extraordinary. When and how? Congratulation! If you knew this, why have you been so mean to me? All those hard words you have given me. I don't get it.--Born53 swe (talk) 22:16, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

I sent a message to Laura's friend from Atlantic era. She says NYC is not right. So please, can you show where you find it.--Born53 swe (talk) 22:34, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

With such information, why are you not editing Laura's biography and background information? You only have to show your reference, and it's done. FamilySearch has nothing about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Born53 swe (talk • contribs) 22:39, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't think I've been "mean" to you, Born53Swe – you and I have had cordial discussions on your WP Talk page. :) If you scroll up, you'll see me saying here that after you posted the Social Security document giving her birth place as Manhattan, I consulted the Manhattan Birth Index. The site is paywalled, unfortunately, but there is a record of a "BRANIGAN, Female" being born there on 3rd July 1952. No first name listed, so at this point I can't be sure whether it's Laura or not. However, it seems unlikely (although not impossible) that someone would "perjure" herself by deliberately giving a false place of birth on an important government document like a Social Security application. Muzilon (talk) 23:09, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

The reason this all went back into question in the first place was AP correcting her age and noting they researched it. I respect the citation and it is good enough to change her date of birth to 1952. I don't have to agree with the outcome to see that as of now, this is where we should be at. AP has now corrected the birthdate and hometown to "July 3, 1952, Armonk, New York". Unless you want to challenge AP as a citation, or if they needed to do something different, I'm all ears. By at this point references have changed. We need to either fix the birthdate and hometown, or we need a good reason not to. Devilmanozzy (talk) 22:27, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

I think it is time for "The Editors" of this page to change the date or update their position as to why not. I dont understand the fury a birth year has caused. I have seen way more controversial topics on Wiki get no debate, yet Laura's birth date stems a debate that seems like we were editing a political page. Her last name is Branigan not Trump or Clinton LOL.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.250.75.112 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Now that her date of birth in the lead and infobox has been changed to 1952 - which I think was the correct course of action - we need to update the text of the explanatory footnote, which currently still states:

Branigan's year of birth is disputed. Although most contemporary sources give her birth year as 1957, at least two sources indicate a birthdate of 1954–1955, and some sources state that she was born in 1952.

I propose changing it to read:

Branigan's year of birth has been disputed. Although most sources at the time of her death gave her birth year as 1957, it has subsequently been accepted by reliable sources that she was born in 1952.

What do others think? Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:34, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

References

No comments? OK, I'll do that. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:48, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Can we also now remove the "Disputed accuracy" tags? Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:52, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm good with your rewording. Not sure about the others on the other side of the argument though. The "Disputed accuracy" I would assume will always be a thing considering that the official Laura Branigan isn't changing their date. Devilmanozzy (talk) 04:00, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

I too am in agreement with your updated footnote. (sorry for late response, a bit under the weather or circumstances). I have no problem with removing the 'disputed' tags because the footnote explains / supports what the dispute was. My hope would be that eventually these talk page discussions will be archived and no one will resurrect the chaos this was. See, even I took a couple of weeks to notice this. Be bold and remove (try and see). Just when they are removed, leave a comment in the edit summary to refer to talk page. Disputed tags, especially two, do hold some import and weight...but we maintain resolution. Fylbecatulous talk 19:27, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Well considering that at least once a month someone is trying to knock it back to 1957, and that the official website gives the 1957 date, there really wont be a end to it for awhile. Probably years after the official website finally goes down. Any time folks research this, they will (like me) find those newspapers and the official with the 1957 date. That is pretty much never going away. Devilmanozzy (talk) 22:05, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Can we also agree I was right from the very beginning? Like Philip Martin from Arkansas Democrat-Gazette wrote: Stig-Ake Persson of Halmstad, Sweden, and he is the world expert on Laura Branigan. He’s also a remarkable researcher. He can show you Branigan’s hand-written application for a Social Security number, filled out on Sept. 29, 1970, when she was 18—not 13." Justice for Laura Branigan. Swedish fan reveals the truth about Laura Take your time and read and feel ashame how you treated me. Haha loosers! It is ok if wikipedia wants to warn and ban me like wiki once did. I am only making this comment to show you who the Laura expert is. It is not wiki contributors, it is an old man from Sweden! Don't write any personal message to me though I am not interested and I will not even answer anyone. By from Sweden --Born53 swe (talk) 13:52, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

WP:NOT#FORUM Devilmanozzy (talk) 20:39, 9 June 2017 (UTC)