Talk:Isidor Straus

Untitled

I'm not sure why the "Fact" tags were put on this article. Had the editor actually looked at any of the references already given, they would have noticed that all facts are doubly or triply referred to in these references. --Charlene 05:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

1997 Film

Why are there so many references to the Cameron film in these Titanic related articles? The film was far from an historical overview of the disaster. There is absolutely no need to mention scenes from the film in articles about actual victims. It's atrocious. Furthermore, it should be remembered that the few survivors still alive at the time of the film's release chose to boycott it. I move, therefore, to have all unnecessary mentionings of the Cameron film in articles about the event and people involved removed. --Bentonia School 17:51, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

If the references remain, I recommend a correction: The scene of Isidor trying to convince his wife to enter the lifeboat is not a deleted scene. I remember she says to him: "Isidor, where you go, I go." This was not a deleted scene, unless there was a re-edit for the DVD. 206.192.35.125 (talk) 18:01, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Racially segregated school named for Straus

An anonymous IP address editor has succeeded in deleting factual material regarding the two separate schools, using separate entrances at a New York City elementary school named for Straus. (P.S. 198 and Lower Laboratory School for Gifted Education, P.S.77.) The editor needs to explain why factual material is being deleted. The different races in different schools is public record, not a biased assertion. Gogue2 (talk) 20:55, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

This really is coatracky and doesn't belong – a controversy about New York school operation in 2010 has nothing whatsoever to do with a biography of Isidor Straus, who died in 1912. The school named in his memory wasn't even built until 1959 and didn't exist in his lifetime. Although factual, I've deleted it as not relevant here. However, the Village Voice reference cited does serve as a reliable source verifying that the school is named after Straus, so it should remain if only for that reason.  JGHowes  ^talk 22:09, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Granted, the building was not made until after his death, but "hello?," we're talking about a memorial. Surely, this segregated school, as Steven Thrasher clearly documented in his Village Voice article, contravenes against Straus' memory, I his values during his lifetime.Gogue2 (talk) 10:44, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

What evidence do we have concerning Straus' views of racial segregation? In his lifetime, segregation was a way of life, particularly in Georgia, where he lived for a time. For most people, it was no more offensive than "men" and "women" on restroom doors today. We must also remember that, in the period from 1896 to 1950, the Supreme Court of the United States, on six separate occasions, upheld the constitutional validity of the doctrine of separate but equal as it relates to racial segregation in public facilities. We must not superimpose today's views and conditions on a time period in which they have no relevance. John Paul Parks (talk) 14:03, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

New Source

The German Historical Institute in Washington, DC has published a short biographical article on Isidor Straus that can be found here: http://www.immigrantentrepreneurship.org/entry.php?rec=27 Immigrantentrep (talk) 16:04, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Otterberg?  Ottersberg?  Ebersberg?  Hmmm ...

The article, in three different places, says that Straus (or Strauss) was born in Otterberg, Ottersberg, or Ebersberg.
Otterberg, Ottersberg, and Ebersberg are three entirely different cities in three different states in three different regions of Germany (in the SW, NW, and SE, respectively).
Ebersberg is indeed in Oberbayern (Upper Bavaria), but Otterberg is in Rheinland-Pfalz, and Ottersberg is in Niedersachsen.
The listed references agree that Straus (or Strauss) was born in Ebersberg.
How did Otterberg and Ottersberg get into the article?
Does anyone know of a reliable source referring to either Otterberg or Ottersberg as the place of birth?
Doc – DocRushing (talk) 20:03, 16 April 2016 (UTC).

@DocRushing:The German Historical Society's article on him reads: "Otterberg, Rhenish Palatinate, Bavaria" -- thoughts? Thellomerca (talk) 18:44, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

The Palatinate was then part of Bavaria.--138.245.1.1 (talk) 10:41, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Slave ownership

Under the section of "early life", it says that his family owned slaves. Clicking onto the reference it linked, I didn't find anything that backed that statement. -- Dietmilk (talk) — Preceding unsigned coment added by Dietmilk (talk • contribs) 10:01, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Merge with Ida Straus

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

So much of the material is overlap. Isidor and Ida have always been remembered and potrayed as together equally. Could it perhaps be better for the sake of clarity and further research to keep the two articles merged together as "Isidor and Ida Straus? ~2026-35756 (talk) 21:18, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

I agree with this, we should keep them together. They have been potrayed as together equally, Ida decided to stay by Isidor's side on the Titanic. They deserve to have their articles merged together IUsethisforprojects (talk) 14:58, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 9 March 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. There is consensus (I'm reading the comment after the latest relist as support for a move) to restore the original name of the article. Some !voters discuss a split; I'm reading less of a consensus there through strength of argument (!vote-count is a little distorted due to little participation despite three relists) and suggest a PROSPLIT down the line. (closed by non-admin page mover) Iseult ^Δx talk to me 22:20, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

---

Isidor and Ida Straus → Isidor Straus – After the rather under-discussed merger, the move of the article name was done, and it was done so good faith. However Isidor Straus is much better known than his wife. He was an established businessman and a prominent national-level politician so this article should be a stand-alone for him. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:38, 9 March 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 00:14, 17 March 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 10:17, 30 March 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 20:27, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Oppose: the article discusses them collectively, including their death on the Titanic, memorials, and film portrayals. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 20:13, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

@Howardcorn33, that's because it was recently edited it to make it seem like that, and added Ida Strauss' page info to this one. However, Isidor Strauss had a LONG career before Titanic. He was the founder of Macy's, a US Congressman, and

In any case, there is substantially more information about him and his life in the article than about her on this page. Their death and married life (mostly when they were married and the children they had together) IS discussed together, for obvious reasons, but she is not mentioned in his career or his early life. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:28, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

@Omnis Scientia: would it be preferable to rename this article to "Death of Isidor and Ida Straus" and split off Isidor into a separate article? ―Howard • 🌽³³ 20:32, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Being honest, I feel like the previous status quo of Ida Straus having her own article and Isidor Straus with his own a better solution. She was one of four first class women to die, a prominent socialite of her time, and her death had a profound impact on the public because she COULD have saved herself but didn't. It seems her article was removed based on very, VERY little (almost no, basically) discussion and no attempt was made to expand her article at all before it was merged with this one. I'm not comfortable with that. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:43, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps a split request should have been initiated then in the first place. I maintain my opposition to this article itself being moved to "Isidor Straus" without a split, but am open to it if such a split is done. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 20:49, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm happy with a split. Though it should start by moving this page since there was no proper merger done and the page was moved by a user without any discussion even if you can call the above discussion a "merge". Just need to revert Ida Straus redirect if the move goes through. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:52, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Also I didn't know a "split request" was a thing or I'd have gone straight to that! Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:53, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Support move and split: next time see WP:PROSPLIT. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 20:59, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

@Howardcorn33, thank you, I will keep it in mind next time. I've been around for a while but I still have much to learn! :) Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:11, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Why was this request ever made? Why can't there be three pages- Isador Straus, Ida Straus, and the couple? Without knowing who requested this being converted (why?), it strikes me as utter misogyny. Why would a woman (who enabled her husband to be so successful) be deleted from history? She was unable to achieve "public accomplishments" in her era because she wasn't allowed to vote, own property, divorce, get a real education, have a career, or do anything in life without being attached to a man. I live on the land where the Strauses lived and went to the park dedicated to them today. And they are celebrated as a couple! Anyone who thinks men achieve what they achieve "on their own" is so mistaken. Men would never be lauded for their public achievements if they did not have a wife to do everything (!!!) behind the scenes. As a society- the fact that we only laud people for their public accomplishments diminishes everything that happens behind the scenes that enables people to attain such status. We need to start acknowledging everything in a person's life that enables them to be a CEO, President, GOAT of their sport, etc. Please tell me why it has been proposed that Ida be erased from history? Stash442 (talk) 21:43, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@Stash442, I agree with you that Ida Straus should have her own article again, if that is what you mean. I don't know why the original merger went through with only two people voting. They are two different people with two different lives. But people only seem to think Ida only is notable for the sinking. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:57, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

BTW, that is not what I'm proposing as you seem to be suggesting. I'm proposing a split so Ida Straus has her own article. I suggest you read my other replies too. Thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:00, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Please give the misogyny bullshit and erasure bullshit and other bullshit a rest. The only question here is: how best to present the information about these two people. And to be blunt, the idea of having an Isidor article, an Ida article, and an "Isidor and Ida" article, is about the stupidest thing I've heard on WP this month (though admittedly we're only 11 days in, so there's plenty of time for someone to come from behind in the stupid-suggestions competition). EEng 22:09, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

@EEng, please don't use language like this. I would like this to be resolved in a civil manner, and it's not helpful at all.

I agree there isn't a need for THREE articles at all - that's a bit too much - but I think they were just being passionate and misunderstood my viewpoint so were trying to make a good faith argument. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:22, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

An essential feature of good-faith argument is assuming good faith. People who think that "misogyny" and "erasure" accusations are trump cards can go jump in the lake. EEng 22:39, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Well I certainly agree that a lot of the accusations were uncalled for. Omnis Scientia (talk) 23:01, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

I'd say all the accusations are unfounded. Here we're having a nice discussion of what to do, and some scold shows up to speculate on what bad things are in our hearts. Really pisses me off. Now let's say no more about it. EEng 04:03, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Agreed. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:10, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

• I think a split is a mistake. The bulk of the article is about both subjects jointly, and would have to be duplicated in separate articles. Even if both subjects are notable, that doesn't mean that separate articles are mandatory, and often a joint presentation is best -- see WP:NOPAGE -- and does no disrespect to the subjects. EEng 21:24, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

  Respectfully, as I note above, Isidor Straus was a prominent citizen of his country as a businessman and politician and, in hindsight, a rather controversial one when it comes to politics. I'd agree if they were indeed known for the same thing but I don't believe so since Isidor is known for MUCH more than that. So the question is whether Ida Straus is notable enough for her own article. I believe she is. Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:41, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

  Please actually read NOPAGE, in particular: Sometimes, several related topics, each of them similarly notable, can be collected into a single page, where the relationships between them can be better appreciated than if they were each a separate page. That's the case here because, as noted, so much material is common to both. EEng 21:54, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject U.S. Congress and WikiProject Biography/Politics and government have been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 10:18, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: How do we feel about a split instead?

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Iseult ^Δx talk to me 20:27, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Isidor Straus being an elected member of Congress should in and of itself warrant him having his own page. The fact the merger happened after all of two people discussed it is ridiculous, good faith or not. PequodOnStationAtLZ (talk) 19:19, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.