Talk:Frederick Buechner

Peer Review of Frederick Buechner

I've done a lot of work on this one and addressed the suggestions from Carcharoth - I'd love to get a peer review/outside perspective. Thank you!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.119.141.178 (talk) 16:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Copied from User talk:Carcharoth 14:04, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Are you interested in reviewing an article on novelist/theologian Frederick Buechner. I am a fan and it seems that some professionals have helped write the article, but I wanted to help get it to FA level... what do you think the article needs next?

Thanks,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Buechner —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.22.54 (talk) 04:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Lead looks good. "The Buechner Institute at King College" section is stubby. The external links section needs formatting. Quotes section looks the wrong approach for that sort of thing. I've reassessed as C-class, and I think if you ask for a proper review, you can get this assessed as B-class, or GA-class. FA-class needs a bit more work. I would try a formal request for peer review and keeping asking around. Copying this to the article talk page. Carcharoth (talk) 14:04, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Clearly, a lot of work has gone into this article, Godric. I would suggest that the lead is too long, and would consider placing the part about his awards elsewhere. The long list of quotes is probably unnecessary – these are available elsewhere, and I would question their place in an encylopedic article. I'll have a look at it in more detail in the next couple of days, and will make further suggestions at the weekend. Best wishes – Agendum (talk) 22:41, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

This is a good, well-written article. As I mentioned before, the lead appears far too long for my liking, I’d stick to a summary of Buechner’s life and work, and incorporate detail like the list of works and tributes further into the article. I would split the biography up into sections. There is just far too much to read without headings to tell the reader where she is. I would also go through and delete any non-essential detail.

My personal view is that there is far too much eulogizing of Buechner and his work, and no criticism. The tributes are somewhat overwhelming. I would also reconsider the list of quotations – they almost need a separate article. I don’t think they have a place here. I just feel that the piece reads as a tribute to Buechner rather than an independent biographical piece. Lastly, the list of important dates is irrelevant – compare with other similar biographies on Wikipedia.

Sorry if this all sounds too negative – this article has good potential and is nearly there. I’ll gladly help with its improvement. – Agendum (talk) 20:57, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The "Thomas Long" referenced in the advisory board for the Buechner lectures is Thomas G. Long. He has a wikipedia page. Shouldn't it be connected?

Quotations section to Wikiquote?

There are enough quotes in this article to warrant moving them to Wikiquote. Would anyone care to take on this task? I'm afraid of botching it, with my scant wiki skills. The Sanity Inspector (talk) 20:29, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Frederick Buechner. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160206182743/http://buechnerinstitute.org/index.php?id=661 to http://www.buechnerinstitute.org/index.php?id=661
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100601191030/http://www.yale.edu/oir/open/pdf_public/W015_Degs_Hon.pdf to http://www.yale.edu/oir/open/pdf_public/W015_Degs_Hon.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160624004057/http://www.artsandletters.org/awards2_search.php to http://www.artsandletters.org/awards2_search.php
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://buechnerinstitute.org/index.php?id=661
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/religion/stories/DN-relhaythorn_19met.ART.South.Edition1.4dc61f4.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3849/is_199805/ai_n8791815
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090625090846/http://www.readthespirit.com/explore/2007/10/009-a-conversat.html to http://www.readthespirit.com/explore/2007/10/009-a-conversat.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080607072143/http://www.readthespirit.com/explore/2007/10/009-the-gifts-o.html to http://www.readthespirit.com/explore/2007/10/009-the-gifts-o.html

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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:27, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Writing section?

The biography section seems overall well-written, but a bit bloated. Any thoughts about dividing it into 2 sections: biography and writing? Compare to J. R. R. Tolkien's page for example. --Afklinst (talk) 20:38, 23 July 2018 (UTC)