Talk:Clare Winger Harris

Feminist Propaganda

Ms. Harris allegedly quit writing in 1930 to raise her kids?? The youngest was 12 years old! Why didn't she quit when they were toddlers running around the house?

She was simply a writer who lost interest or suffered writer's block. It happens. Sometimes writing no longer important to them.

And merely having strong female characters does not a feminist make. It often means that the writer used her own gender perspective. There is no evidence from this article that Ms. Harris was anything but a writer -- which is an honor by itself. Making her a feminist writer seems mere projection by female chauvinists. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scott Adler (talk • contribs).

Several sources say she quit writing in 1930 to raise and educate her kids. I am only reporting what the sources say. As for feminist propaganda, I don't see how the article goes that route. The only mention of feminism is to mention that some feminists have embraced her as a pioneer (again, a referenced statement.--Alabamaboy 23:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about this guy. He's a troll and trying to rile up trouble and controversy, just look at the baiting he did at Title IX: [1] when he should know that Wikipedia is not a forum. 128.227.51.157 02:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

GA review

I see a pattern emerging in your articles, Alabamaboy! I'm glad that someone is working on these early science fiction writers. Perhaps you might consider eventually working on a featured topic such as "Early science fiction writers" or "Early women science fiction writers." It's a lot of work, but I think that these topics can be very helpful to users if done well. I am going to pass this article now because I feel that it meets the definition of GA (it broadly covers the topic), but I do hope that you do more research and expand the section on her writing to include an analysis of her style and her topics (like I suggested for Gertrude Barrows Bennett). Also, if there is any additional information available on her life that you can dig up from anywhere, that would be good (it seems like that might be hard, though - I see you are already reduced to translating). Finally, I would also suggest expanding the lead (per WP:LEAD) and adhering more strictly to the manual of style (WP:MOS), if you decide to go for FA at some point in the future. Awadewit 20:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks. As I research more on the Bennett article, I'll also look for more info on Harris. Best, --Alabamaboy 12:02, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Clare Winger Harris/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 08:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose):

   b (MoS):

   • The Lead should be a concise summary of the entire article. Currently it fails on this as it should summarize the Life and Critical view and influence sections. I made some re-organization and removed one duplicate links section. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC) Y

     I expanded the lead somewhat; the first lead para uses citations but this is not required so I have not done so in the new lead para. Mike Christie (talk) 10:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references):

   • I have fixed a number of dead links, but one remains, marked in the text [2]. I have reformatted cites, de-duped them and separated cites in instances where two had been crammed into one reference. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC) Y

     Fixed. Mike Christie (talk) 10:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

   b (citations to reliable sources):

   • OK

   c (OR):

3. It is broad in its scope.

   a (major aspects):

   b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):

   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   • Basically it is down to one dead link and some expansion of the lead - on hold for seven days. Projects and major contributors will be informed. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC) Y
   • Thanks for your hard work. I am happy to confirm the class of this article as GA. Jezhotwells (talk) 07:58, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Clare Winger Harris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927021615/http://www.feministische-sf.de/einzelne_autorinnen/fsf_clare-winger-harris.html to http://www.feministische-sf.de/einzelne_autorinnen/fsf_clare-winger-harris.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:09, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Clare Winger Harris

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.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Kept. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 04:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

This 2007 Good Article has many unsourced statements, including parts of the "Critical view and influence" section. Additionally, I think some of the sources used are questionable, such as sources 7 and 9. Spinixster (chat!) 12:50, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I believe I can fix these issues and also give the article a general overhaul. But I won't have time to work on it until later in the week. Also, hard to believe it's been 17 years since I created this article. SMDH. SouthernNights (talk) 14:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

SouthernNights do you still intend to get round to this? No worries if not. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, my bad. I got slammed with life stuff and simply forgot. I'll work on this in the coming days. SouthernNights (talk) 18:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: I've now addressed all the issues raised here along with giving the article a good rewrite, adding new information and citations, and doing a general cleanup.--SouthernNights (talk) 21:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
  • SouthernNights, if you wouldn't mind, there are a couple of uncited statements that still require a citation; if those are appropriately sourced I think we can close this as keep. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:40, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

    I'm happy to fix those. Give me a few days, though, b/c I'm slammed with work through the weekend. SouthernNights (talk) 13:09, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

    Ok, I've fixed all theses remaining citation issues. SouthernNights (talk) 14:15, 23 March 2024 (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.