Talk:Dionne quintuplets

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

Birthdate?[edit]

User:SD6-Agent's comment moved from article:

I have conflicting sources on an exact birthplace. If anyone could find out for sure where it is we would be grateful

--Menchi 09:14, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)

According to the Canadian Encyclopedia, Microsoft Encarta and sources at the CBC, they were born in Corbeil.

I looked for equally reliable sources saying they were born in Callander. The closest we could come was the Encyclopaedia Britannica and a virtual museum operated by the City of North Bay, which say they were born either "outside" or "near" Callander. However, "outside" and "near" aren't "in."

Moreover, in The Dionne Years, Pierre Berton identified their father, Oliva, as living in Corbeil, in the Township of East Ferris. A map in the book shows the boundary lines for East Ferris to include Corbeil and the farmhouse where the quints were born. Callander is one township over, in North Himsworth. In The Dionnes, by veteran Toronto Star reporter, Ellie Tescher, Corbeil is also identified as the birthplace.

The confusion arises because Callander, as the larger community, benefited far more from the commercial circus that the birth created. In addition, the doctor who delivered them (and essentially kidnapped them) worked in Callander, where he had a hospital.

--User:Paul From Ottawa

Tomato, Tomahto. I think they were born somewhere between the two on Highway 94. East Ferris, yes- but to be fair Callander is in the extreme NE of North Himsworth (which is now the Mun. of Callander btw). I travel on 94 a lot to get to my cottage, and many times my father has pointed out their place of birth. Earl Andrew 21:24, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
More to the point, their birth is registered as being in Corbeil. --User:Paul From Ottawa

Could the movie Quints have anything to do with this? Off the top of my head, I can only recall similarities being Five kids, local fame because of it, and the kids in that movie being put in a room that spectators could see them in. 152.163.100.7

wrong information[edit]

Every source says that the quintuplets were born in 1934, but the picture of the babies was taken in 1930 and the World's Fair in Chicago where the parents wanted to present the children was in 1933. ---Nicor 16:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, the picture of the babies was not taken in 1930. "ca" in the image caption means circa, or 'about' in Latin. Chances are that attempts to accurately date the photo have failed. Maybe 1933, maybe 1934. Can't tell how old the babies were from the photo. -- PFHLai 00:05, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The newspaper clipings that I have of the girls are from 1934 and 1935 in which they turned 1 in 1935. My mother had made a scrapbook with clippings and their photos. m geegh

According to a Time Magazine article dated May 31, 1937, the babies were born in 1934. The article also stated that the quints were NOT identical. CKE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.194.2.9 (talk) 23:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Dionne Quintuplets were IDENTICAL! They are still the ONLY known set to have all survived (and that was one of the main reasons why there was such an interest to see them)and they were born in Corbeil (Not Callander) on May 28, 1934. The Time magazine mentioned above is wrong and is the only source I've ever seen make such an obviously wrong mistake. From 1935 until 1938, they were studied by a team of child psychologists and doctors and their study findings were published. (See: Blatz , W. E., et al. "Collected Studies on the Dionne Quintuplets". Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1937.) Also, a lot of the information regarding the Dionne Quintuplets written during their childhood is inaccurate and/or very biased. For more complete, accurate and up-to-date information see: Pierre Berton's "The Dionne Years" or Ellie Tesher's "The Dionnes". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.232.242 (talk) 02:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The girls were long thought to be identical but there was not way of knowing for sure back then. 173.165.104.25 (talk) 11:31, 18 February 2019 (UTC)BeaMyra[reply]

source for money settlement[edit]

40 billion CAD? sounds suspiciously high to me... 70.52.6.2 06:33, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I believe the amount is closer to 2.8 million. Deepalmolive 06:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And yet the article now says 4 million lump sum. ---- WPaulB (talk) 18:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The citation given for "In 1998, the sisters reached a monetary settlement with the Ontario government as compensation for their exploitation" appears to have been written before any settlement was reached (if it ever was). All it says was that the surviving women were offered $1.5K/month each, but there's certainly no indication that they accepted the offer or were intending to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.224.225.48 (talk) 01:54, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alive ?[edit]

I read that, three of the sisters are death, but the other two are alive ? I'm not sure, it can be possible. --AndreaMimi (talk) 12:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't say who is alive, but Emilie died in 1954, Marie died in 1970, and Yvonne died in 2001. That leaves only Annette and Cecile to be accounted for. They were alive in 2001 when Yvonne died. - Nunh-huh 14:29, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this information, Nunh-huh. There are also Annette and Cecilie still alive and about 70 years old. --AndreaMimi (talk) 19:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Country Doctor[edit]

I clicked on the "blue" title "The Country Doctor" which should have been a link to a 1936 film about the Dionne sisters. I was taken to a stub article about a 1909 silent movie starring Mary Pickford. Someone may wish to deactivate the link to the wrong film. --Karenthewriter (talk) 18:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence that they were all identical[edit]

Although this has always been taken for granted, there is no way to know without DNA studies. Maybe the article should say only that they have always been thought to be identical. The two who were smallest in childhood (Emilie and Marie, I think, so we will never know now) never really looked as identical as the other three. The "all identical" claim may have been part of the hype, as people are more fascinated with identicals. If it is indeed unsupported by any real evidence, the article should say so.Rose bartram (talk) 13:37, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

High-tech DNA is a stronger test, but there were other tests back then to demonstrate a high probability of being identical. One could start with blood type, but I expect that there was other, stronger evidence.--Spellage (talk) 13:42, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lydiapeever (talk) 16:17, 19 March 2009 (UTC) perhaps the entire medical journals published by Sick Kids Hospital and the University of Toronto on the Dionne sisters could shed some light on your question as to whether they were identical or not[reply]

I hope you are not being sarcastic here, as that would be an excessive response to something which was, after all, just a comment in the talk section--I made no change to the article at any time and will not. The consensus of Wikipedia editors is clear that they were identical. If you are asking for clarification on my point, the concern was that the diagnosis of monozygosity was made largely on the basis of dermatoglyphics (a specialty of the doctor who concluded that they were identical) and other criteria which, like dermatoglyphics, have not held up well to the test of time. But there is no reason that the accuracy of the determination needs to be an issue.Rose bartram (talk) 12:11, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lydiapeever (talk) 22:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC) i was simply being plain, not sarcastic at all - apologies. in the Blatz books, there is documentation regarding their blood types, footprint, and images of their ears (among other images displaying identical traits). It is generally agreed that the single-egg mass split to the Yvonne/Annette and the Cecile/Emilie/Marie mass, the latter which split further to the apparent 'egg shaped mass' that Elzire passed in @ her fourth month and Cecile, then Emilie/Marie. From what i understand, the sharing of a single placenta is key in determining 'identical' twins. the preferred term is monozygotic.[reply]

Give Lydiapeever a cigar, as that was the definition of "identical" which I learned in Med School. The Placental mass is studied to observe if it is in a singular "mass", or if it consists of several placental "sub-sections" which cluster together. Very seldom are there more than three separate placentas present in the uterus, placental migration almost always assures that they reside in the same location for (theoretically) purposes of space conservation and adequate perfusion. They also believe that this lowers the possibility of placental abruption.PA MD0351XXE (talk) 06:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tourism[edit]

"It was only rivaled by Radio City, Mount Vernon, and GEttysburg of the United States."

In no accounts have i read the above information. perhaps figures of tourism dollars or headcounts for these attractions from 1934-43 or a citation is in order

Lydiapeever (talk) 12:36, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the Museum section, the inline link goes directly to the Museum's homepage rather than to a wikipedia entry. Not sure if that's allowed or how to change it. 99.245.142.194 (talk) 17:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Film sequels[edit]

Halliwell's Film Guide lists two sequels to The Country Doctor: Reunion (1936) and Five of a Kind (1938).
The page now lists the first, but not the second. Halliwell may be using an alternative title.
Varlaam (talk) 22:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then you should add it in there since it is sourced.P0PP4B34R732 (talk) 22:42, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Identical??[edit]

From the article: "Émilie and Marie shared an embryonic sac (and were identical twins)."

"All but Émilie were/are right-handed."

These cannot both be true. If she was the only left-handed one, then she was not identical to any of the others. Where are the sources for this information? Tad Lincoln (talk) 00:19, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Handedness is NOT genetic, it is common for identical siblings to have one left handed and another right handed. --71.118.133.222 (talk) 01:19, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Human rights abuses in Canada[edit]

I created the new "Human rights abuses in Canada" category (in similar fashion to other existing "Human rights abuses in (country)" categories) to encompass the quints, and promptly added the article to that (previously-nonexistent) category. At 07:05 (UTC) on 14 May 2013, User:Noq removed the category, and at 04:28 (UTC) on 15 May, I re-added it with an explanation. What do you think about this new category? There are no other articles in it, so it has to do with what you think about this article.

Thanks for taking your time to talk about this,

User:Davidfreesefan23 (talk) 04:36, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion it is not sufficient to create a category and add it to this article. You need to WP:verify it and prove it in the article with WP:reliable sources. An edit summary saying you believe it is not a reason for it to be there. It has been reverted again - please do not re-add it unless you can get consensus here per WP:BRD. noq (talk) 07:01, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pop culture trivia[edit]

@Noq: The addition of "Oh, Mr Porter! is correct. I have added a script reference also - the script transcript includes "Murphy" and the pun, although it has a typo within it.

@Paul Benjamin Austin: Why did you restore the useless trivia in the pop culture section? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 07:02, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Oiyarbepsy: Because it's been in the article for a long time without objection, you shouldn't delete things on a whim, we need to explain the Quints phenomenon in the thirties and without it we have a pretty thin article. Paul Austin (talk) 07:24, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But most of this stuff isn't the 30s, or even the 40s. We could delete the section entirely, and we wouldn't have a "thin" article by any stretch of the imagination. These sections used to be on every article and they really diminished our reputation, and we have, fortunately, eliminated most of them. For God sake's, we got one-liners from Mash, a show made 40 years after they were born, we have passing mentions in songs, one that is nothing more that Mr Dionne and not even explicitly about them. These sections need to be limited to works that actually cover or parody the quints in depth, not every possible passing mention. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 07:30, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK


The Simpsons "Eight Misbehavin'", seventh episode of the eleventh season: The scenario of exhibiting the babies in a theme park echoes that of the Dionne Quintuplets, who were exhibited to the public in "Quintland" during the 1930s in Ontario. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.116.101 (talk) 05:54, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble archiving links on the article[edit]

Hello. I am finding myself repeatedly archiving links on this page. This usually happens when the archive doesn't recognize the archive to be good.

This could be because the link is either a redirect, or I am unknowingly archiving a dead link. Please check the following links to see if it's redirecting, or in anyway bad, and fix them, if possible.

In any event this will be the only notification in regards to these links, and I will discontinue my attempts to archive these pages.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:51, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dionne quintuplets. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 12:52, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dionne quintuplets. 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) 13:59, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dionne quintuplets. 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) 01:35, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I Found Hundreds of Newspaper articles of Quintuplets 1936[edit]

I won an auction in superior wi & a box full of newspaper cutouts from 1930’s on up all pictures & articles are about the kids. Hundreds of cutouts. If anyone interested in them, lmk, I’d like them to go to a family member or museum if possible. Spikesnu (talk) 04:35, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dionne_quintuplets&oldid=1212345652"