Elisa.rolle (talk | contribs) |
ClueBot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 3 discussions to User talk:Elisa.rolle/Archive 1. (BOT) |
||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
|archivenow=<nowiki>{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}</nowiki> |
|archivenow=<nowiki>{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}</nowiki> |
||
}} |
}} |
||
== Nomination of [[:Isophene Goodin Bailhache]] for deletion == |
|||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">[[File:Ambox warning orange.svg|48px|alt=|link=]]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article '''[[:Isophene Goodin Bailhache]]''' is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to [[Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines|Wikipedia's policies and guidelines]] or whether it should be [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deleted]]. |
|||
The article will be discussed at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isophene Goodin Bailhache]] until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. |
|||
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd notice --> [[User:Winged Blades of Godric|<span style="color: red">∯</span><span style="font-family:Verdana"><b style="color:#070">WBG</b></span>]][[User talk:Winged Blades of Godric|<sup><span style="color:#00F">converse</span></sup>]] 15:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Apparently this is how things work on Wikipedia... == |
|||
{{u|SusunW}}, {{u|Rosiestep}}, {{u|Thsmi002}}, {{u|Megalibrarygirl}}, this is apparently a subtle way to have a backslap to another editor after an apparently civil discussion went wrong (note, in the Article for deletion reason the sentence "despite the quasi-good efforts of SusunW"). [[Isophene Goodin Bailhache]] is now up for deletion. I'm too fed up by the current state of Wikipedia to even have the slightly will to do something to save this article. I just want to record my disgust for this approach, that unfortunately I found in too many editors/administrators. --[[User:Elisa.rolle|Elisa.rolle]] ([[User talk:Elisa.rolle#top|talk]]) 15:43, 22 September 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:{{u|Elisa.rolle}}, Whilst I guess your pings breach [[WP:CANVASS|canvassing guidelines]], I have extremely high regards for two of them and believe them to be sufficiently independent, shall they cast their opinions (whatever it might be).Anyways, if you've sources, that might improve the article or you wish to offer a rebuttal to my nomination, feel free to write it down over here and I will copy it to the AfD page. [[User:Winged Blades of Godric|<span style="color: red">∯</span><span style="font-family:Verdana"><b style="color:#070">WBG</b></span>]][[User talk:Winged Blades of Godric|<sup><span style="color:#00F">converse</span></sup>]] 15:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::{{u|Winged Blades of Godric}}, first, the people I pinged are those who worked on the article just day before, second, I'm indef blocked, therefore I cannot do nothing other then ping people on my own talk page, third, I kindly ask you not to engage with me. [[User:Elisa.rolle|Elisa.rolle]] ([[User talk:Elisa.rolle#top|talk]]) 15:51, 22 September 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Elisa, I don't think it's a big secret that I'm pissed off that you're blocked, not least because I spent time with the original blocking administrator to get the block reduced, then somebody else came in and blocked you for something I thought was pretty innocuous. I personally want to unblock you but I would be [[WP:WHEEL|wheel-warring]] with Fram and almost certainly lose my administrator tools if I did it. I can review the block on [[WP:AN]] and see what consensus comes back with, but I would have to come up with good arguments (and be backed up by Megalibrarygirl, SusunW, Rosie etc) for it to succeed. |
|||
Godric, I think Elisa knows what the canvassing guidelines are; given her situation, linking to them here is not very subtle or particularly nice. It feels like rubbing salt in their wounds. |
|||
Everyone else, I know some of you are fed up with Elisa's attitude and continually tripping up on copyright violations - but I just see somebody who wants to help the project and has got increasingly frustrated at not being able to contribute in a manner that can satisfy everyone. [[User:Ritchie333|<b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b>]] [[User talk:Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)</sup>]] 20:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:{{u|Ritchie333}}, I think you have noticed that when I was blocked this last time I did not contest it, actually I took a Clark Gable in Gone With the Wind's attitude, i.e. "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn!" I think I will continue in my Gable's impersonification, I had always the feeling that Rhett had a better life after Rossella. [[User:Elisa.rolle|Elisa.rolle]] ([[User talk:Elisa.rolle#top|talk]]) 21:11, 22 September 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== What I would like to see disappearing from Wikipedia == |
|||
sentences like: |
|||
- this woman born in 18** is not notable since modern reliable source does not cite them. |
|||
- this woman is not notable (despite various source in newspaper of the time) and is married or is the daughter to some "important" man (cause he was a politician, a businessman, something else) therefore merge her with his page. |
|||
- this woman (who got a degree when the number of women vs men getting higher degrees was probably 3 to 100, who had a business when women did not have the right to private property if they were married, who was involved in social life when women did not have the right to vote) is not notable since she was "just" a woman prominent in social circles. |
|||
- this woman or man is not notable cause if you google them there are few results... |
|||
- even if this article is well researched and well written, the subject is not notable according to this or that or that other checklist that someone has written in some thousands policies on wikipedia. [[User:Elisa.rolle|Elisa.rolle]] ([[User talk:Elisa.rolle#top|talk]]) 18:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::There are just far too many people, regardless of gender, who do not understand that women were not citizens in their own right until after the 1930s, that there were no significant studies or inclusion of women in the historical records until after 1970, and that most women's history has yet to be told. Women involved in the Women's Liberation Movement on every continent where it spread commented that they thought they were the first women who had ever protested their treatment because no history of suffrage had yet been written. A BBC special airing this year on women factory workers shows that there is still little understanding of women's fight for equal opportunity and access. We just have to keep writing and hope that eventually people become aware that women weren't bystanders, that there is still much of our history that is untold, and that women did not have to do the same things as men or be covered in the same type of sources to be notable. Don't give up, don't surrender, but never, ever argue with them or give in to their aggression. By the by, I love the Clark Gable stance! Mine would more probably be the one taken by [[Margaret Brown]] who got so fed up with the bunk created about her, she withdrew from engaging. ;) [[User:SusunW|SusunW]] ([[User talk:SusunW|talk]]) 21:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::Never given up ;-) just changed the venue. I'm focusing on LGBTQ people, and I'm just back from Bristol and Bath where I visited the living places of many interesting women and men (the Michael Fields, Edward Clifford, Elizabeth Blackwell, John Addington Symonds, Norman Moor, Cary Grant, Catherine Winkworth, Joan Tuckett, William Beckford, Lytton Strachey, ...). I also paid homage to Amelia B. Edwards's burial place where she is buried with her female partner. I found the church where is buried Barbara Montagu (an article you helped saving) and saw her memorial inside it. All these researches and photos now go feeding my website. Before, in my naivite, I was uploading my photos on Wikimedia, can you believe how stupid I was? Pearls to the Pigs. And now NO ONE can delete my pages. As I said, Rhett had a better life after Rossella/Scarlett. [[User:Elisa.rolle|Elisa.rolle]] ([[User talk:Elisa.rolle#top|talk]]) 22:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC) |
|||
==[[Inez Mabel Crawford]]== |
==[[Inez Mabel Crawford]]== |
||
[[File:Inez Mabel Crawford.jpg|thumb|Inez Mabel Crawford]] |
[[File:Inez Mabel Crawford.jpg|thumb|Inez Mabel Crawford]] |
Revision as of 03:28, 30 September 2018
- SusunW, may you please add this portrait to the article I created on Inez Mabel Crawford? Thank you, Elisa.rolle (talk) 18:57, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
- The image bottom has in big legible letters "Barker" and in smaller less-legible letters "Ottawa Kansas". (Unfortunately no date; the even smaller and even less legible text is his opening hours.) That probably means A. W. Barker, who appears to have left Ottawa before 1900. So your "before 1923" date looks good, and the place matches where Crawford is from. Looks legit to me. Added. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:40, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
- David Eppstein, thank you for finding the tip about the photographer proving the date around 1890s. I was almost sure about that giving the looking of Inez, she is a girl there for sure not the old lady she should have been if the photo was after 1923. Pity someone else decided to crop it removing the details of the photographer, but at least you put it in the description. Elisa.rolle (talk) 07:56, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- You're welcome! I think that by cropping the bottom without also cropping the top they made it look unbalanced. But maybe that's just me. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:43, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you David Eppstein I was off-line most of the day yesterday dealing with real life stuff. Sorry I couldn't help Elisa, but glad David stepped in. SusunW (talk) 15:48, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- David Eppstein, I actually was thinking the same, forgot to crop it more then; have cropped it now to a more standard portrait ratio. Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:56, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's better. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:58, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- You're welcome! I think that by cropping the bottom without also cropping the top they made it look unbalanced. But maybe that's just me. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:43, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
The article John Frey and Peter Morris has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
No indication of fulfillment of WP:GNG.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mutt Lunker (talk) 22:52, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
- Ymblanter, thank you and I'm not opposed to the idea of renaming the page John Frey if you think is better, but please leave the info about Peter Morris, he may not be worthy of his own page, but he was an essential part of Frey's life, as testify by their tombstone. Elisa.rolle (talk) 07:54, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of John Frey and Peter Morris for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Frey and Peter Morris is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Frey and Peter Morris until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:17, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
Ymblanter, you removed the propose deletion tag from the article, so maybe you can do something on the AfD? I'm indef-blocked so I cannot do much. I'm pretty sure that researching John Frey, more it will be available about his academic relevance. As for Morris he was a minor author, so not sure he is meeting notability as his own, that is the reason why, given the common tombstone, I included him in Frey's article, and I'm not opposed to the idea of renaming the page just for Frey. Elisa.rolle (talk) 09:32, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
Note: I'm pretty tired to be "accused" of canvassing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Frey and Peter Morris. a) if you post an AfD on an article of mine while I'm indef-blocked, I cannot do much to save the article if not posting on my own talk page, considering I'm not even able to comment on that AfD. b) the canvassing page states "In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it be done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus. Canvassing is notification done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way, and is considered inappropriate. This is because it compromises the normal consensus decision-making process, and therefore is generally considered disruptive behavior." Above I pinged ONE editor who had removed the propose deletion tag from the article; to this user I told that probably the article can be improved (considering I cannot do that) and BTW I also admitted that a renaming of the article would be useful. Therefore sorry, this is not canvassing, and I'm TIRED of pointing finger people. Elisa.rolle (talk) 10:27, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- David Eppstein, if I may, I would rewrite the article in this way:
Proposed rewrite
John Andrew Frey (August 29, 1929 – August 22, 1997) was a specialist in 19th century French literature, an author of books on French symbolism, Emile Zola, and Victor Hugo.
Early life
John "Jack" Andrew Frey was born on August 29, 1929, the son of George Henry Frey and Marie Berter. He attended Catholic University and was a Fulbright Scholar.[1] In 1955 he collaborated to The Stylistic Relationship Between Poetry and Prose in the Cántico Espiritual of San Juan de la Cruz, Volumes 52-55.[2] He graduated in 1957 and his thesis was Motif symbolism in the disciples of Mallarmé, which he published in 1969.[3]
Career
John Frey became a professor of Romance Languages at George Washington University. He was a specialist in 19th century French literature, and was an author of books on French symbolism (The aesthetics of the Rougon-Macquart, 1976),[4] Emile Zola, and Victor Hugo (Les Contemplations of Victor Hugo: The Ash Wednesday Liturgy, 1988,[5] and A Victor Hugo Encyclopedia, 1999[6]). He also wrote magazine articles on François-René de Chateaubriand, Honoré de Balzac, Washington Irving, and Andre Gide.[1][3] Frey criticized the use of medieval imagery in symbolist writing: "The whole representation of the Middle Ages, the captive princess, the enchanted castles, fairies, ghosts, and knights-errants... is oriented towards a sensualism. One is reminded of Swinburne making use of the Pre-Raphaelities in England... It is the cloaking of earthly desires in a mantle of aristocracy, of manor houses, gilded ladies, estates swarming with peacocks and swans, of boat and garden parties, and the perpetual games of love."[7]
Personal life
Frey met his longtime partner, Peter Morris (December 29, 1929 - August 29, 2010), while they were both students at Catholic University. Even if fellow students, they did not met at college, but at what was at the time Washington, D.C., most popular gay venues, the Chicken Hut, a piano bar/restaurant on H Street near Lafayette Park. The Mattachine Society sponsored biweekly Sunday afternoon gay dances.[1] Morris was born on December 29, 1929, in Peekskill, New York, the son of Louis Morris and Dorothea Chaplin.[8] He was an expert in French cuisine. He was on the Board of Directors of Dignity, a gay Catholic Organization, and co-authored their community cookbook.[1]
John Frey and Peter Morris were together 43 years. Frey died on August 22, 1997, Morris died on August 29, 2010. They are buried together in the gay corner of the Congressional Cemetery, in Washington, D.C.[1] Their tomb are two benches and a table, inviting people to sit and read their inscription: "Us While wandering down the back roads Of my mind I came upon a memory of us Faces garden-fresh blooming and Full of promise. My inner-eye welled up Furrows have etched their way Into our fields of being. What had youth's straightness Now bends and curves into Accommodation. We have become ourselves Not alone, but with each other's Help. On the face of it, youth's bloom Has gone Replaced by hardier stuff Whose roots are deep and all Encompassing. How fortunate we were to Have loved each other then And even more so, to still Love each other Now. Forty-three years together Is not enough But we will be together again. John Andrew Frey August 29, 1929 August 22, 1997 Peter Louis Morris December 29, 1929 August 29, 2010 In Memory of our Parents George Henry Frey Marie Berter Frey Louis Morris Sr. Dorothea Chaplin Morris And our pets, Bucky, Pudgy, Major, Jelp I II, Rosh I II III, Franah I II, Mime I II, Madame"[1]
References
- ^ a b c d e f "A KEY - Leonard Matlovich" (PDF). Retrieved 24 September 2017.
- ^ The Stylistic Relationship Between Poetry and Prose in the Cántico Espiritual of San Juan de la Cruz, Volumes 52-55. Catholic University of America Press. 1955. Retrieved 29 September 2017.
- ^ a b "Frey, John Andrew (1929-)". Retrieved 29 September 2017.
- ^ Reviews of The aesthetics of the Rougon-Macquart:
- Baguley, David (January 1980), French Forum, 5 (1): 80–81, JSTOR 40551050
{{citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (link) - Kamm, Lewis (Summer 1980), Modern Fiction Studies, 26 (2): 357–359, JSTOR 26280488
{{citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (link) - Humphreys, Frank E., III (February 1981), The French Review, 54 (3): 473–474, JSTOR 390728
{{citation}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: untitled periodical (link) - Gilroy, James P. (1984), Rocky Mountain Review of Language and Literature, 38 (4): 252, doi:10.2307/1346902
{{citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (link)
- Baguley, David (January 1980), French Forum, 5 (1): 80–81, JSTOR 40551050
- ^ Reviews of Les Contemplations of Victor Hugo:
- Erickson, John D. (Fall–Winter 1988–1989), Nineteenth-Century French Studies, 17 (1/2): 228–230, JSTOR 23532530
{{citation}}
: Check date values in:|date=
(help)CS1 maint: untitled periodical (link) - Bach, Raymond E. (Winter 1989), South Central Review, 6 (4): 108–109, doi:10.2307/3189669
{{citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (link) - Nash, Suzanne (January–February 1991), Revue d'Histoire littéraire de la France, 91e (1): 123–124, JSTOR 40530209
{{citation}}
: CS1 maint: untitled periodical (link)
- Erickson, John D. (Fall–Winter 1988–1989), Nineteenth-Century French Studies, 17 (1/2): 228–230, JSTOR 23532530
- ^ Review of A Victor Hugo encyclopedia:
- ^ Haralson, Eric L.; Hollander, John (1998). Encyclopedia of American Poetry: The nineteenth century. Taylor & Francis. p. 299. Retrieved 29 September 2017.
- ^ "Peter L. Morris". http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/washingtonpost/obituary.aspx?page=lifestory&pid=145070903.
{{cite web}}
:|access-date=
requires|url=
(help); External link in
(help); Missing or empty|publisher=
|url=
(help)
Even if Morris is not an important author, consider that Dignity [1] is still a strong organization in the US. Thank you, Elisa.rolle (talk) 22:26, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- PamD, thank you for how you tweaked the layout. Elisa.rolle (talk) 08:06, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
October 2018 at Women in Red
Please join us... We have four new topics for Women in Red's worldwide online editathons in October!
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |