Talk:Fears in Solitude
 | Fears in Solitude has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 3, 2009. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that conversation poems of Samuel Coleridge were inspired by many events: adulterous love, marriage sex, a French invasion, a bad childhood, depressed birds, a fever, burning his foot, and a better poet? | |||||||||
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
GA Review
edit- This review is transcluded from Talk:Fears in Solitude/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jake Wartenberg 01:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
- Well-written:
- :✔
- Factually accurate and verifiable:
- :✔
- Broad in its coverage:
- :✔
- Neutral:
- :✔
- Stable:
- ✔ Yep.
- Images:
- ✔ Captions looks fine; no fair use.
- I don't know if this is my place to butt in, but I will anyway. :) OR, thanks for writing this up. I have a few comments, rather randomly. The four reviews were published in journals that have articles (such as Critical Review, which is The Critical Review). More things can be wikilinked (such as The Rime of the Ancient Mariner). The Critical reception section could do with a bit of explanation on who these individual critics were--Swinburne needs a wikilink and a modifier that in a word or two suggests his status as a critic. The same applies to Edward Dowden. The "Following this" in that section is a bit pedestrian--is this meant chronologically or causally?
What I would really like to see (but this might well go beyond GA status), and this applies to the other conversation poems as well, is the contextualization of the individual poems as Conversation poems (a nice-looking article, by the way), both in "Themes" and in "Critical response". The plain truth is, for instance, that there huge differences between the poems in how often they are taught and anthologized; the stock of "Fears" is decidedly low these days, though not as low as "France." I hope you will go on to make these in to FAs, and I think such expansion of the article would serve you well there. And that is also the kind of section that may give a you a generalizing statement with which to conclude the lede. (Incidentally, I looked at almost all your recent Coleridge activity, and much of what I said here I would apply there as well.) Sincerely Thanking you for your Contribution, Drmies (talk) 19:21, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- I would still like to see the poem contextualized as a conversation poem. — Jake Wartenberg 23:27, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Tiniest imaginable contribution: capitalisation might be looked at: the OED requires the initial capital for Jacobins (in the political sense - the lower case is admitted for two varieties of bird and a soup). On the other hand "Prime Minister" need not be capitalised. - Tim riley (talk) 18:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- I think that the basic requirements for GA have been fulfilled here. It might still be nice to see "the contextualization of the individual poems as Conversation poems (a nice-looking article, by the way), both in "Themes" and in "Critical response"" (thanks Drmies), but this is a relatively minor issue. — Jake Wartenberg 23:27, 31 October 2009 (UTC)