Jump to content

Talk:Voltairine de Cleyre

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleVoltairine de Cleyre has been listed as one of the History 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 25, 2024Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 24, 2024.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Voltairine de Cleyre (pictured), despite losing her ability to move or speak due to illness, refused to accept last rites by scowling at the priest?
On this day...A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 20, 2017.

Fact Check

[edit]

A recent edit to the article states: "In 1909, together with Lucy Parsons, she renounced anarchism and joined the Communist Party of America."

Yet the Lucy Parsons article states that Parsons joined in 1939. What is the source for this edit?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.168.133 (talk) 08:43, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further research it would appear to be Bob Black who added this sentence to this article, and the one on Lucy Parsons. Given the history of this individual with regards to the anarchist movement, the current conflict between two statements inserted by one individual, and the lack of any evidence provided to support it thus far, I'm going to remove it for now. I'm also adding a fact check request to the Lucy Parsons page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.168.133 (talk) 02:11, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Voltairine de Cleyre. 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:

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) 04:08, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
PASSED
Passed GAN review.

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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Voltairine de Cleyre/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Grnrchst (talk · contribs) 09:57, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Edwininlondon (talk · contribs) 15:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'd be happy to review this in the next few days. I may make the odd minor edit in the process. Edwininlondon (talk) 15:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking this on! I look forward to your review :) --Grnrchst (talk) 17:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to have to deliver bad news, but the article simply is too long, as per WP:TOOBIG. It should be trimmed down by 25-30%. This may not be an easy task, but I'm afraid this has to be done. I'm happy to keep the review open, if you like, giving you a chance to work on this in the next few weeks. The only thing I want to add at this stage is that most of the items in Other sources are not used at all in the article. It is expected that every source listed is actually used. Edwininlondon (talk) 09:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC) Edwininlondon (talk) 09:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I figured I'd have to cut down on this, so I'll be sure to get to trimming it soon. As for the "other sources", those were previously cited in an earlier version of the article; I was supposed to move them to a further reading section, but I guess I forgot to do that. It's rectified now.
I'll try trimming it down over the coming days. If you're willing and able, some pointers for where to start would help me a lot at figuring out what kind of things to cut. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:20, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not at all familiar with the topic, so it's tricky for me to judge what should be trimmed. It seems to me each of the sections are worth keeping. I'd go through each section and ask myself: What is essential? How can I say the same with fewer words. Childhood section probably is the easiest to cut down on. Edwininlondon (talk) 15:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doing that now, cutting all the superfluous details. Grnrchst (talk) 16:00, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wee update, sorry for the delay. I've so far managed to trim 10% of the article away; I'm hoping I'll be able to get it down further over the next few days. I'll probably have to do another pass in order to get the word count below 10,000, but this first pass has already led to the prose being tighter, so I'm happy to do it. --Grnrchst (talk) 15:58, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just finished my first pass and I've gotten it down 17.5%. I'll give it another pass soon and see how much more I can trim. --Grnrchst (talk) 12:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Edwininlondon: Hey there! Apologies for taking so long to see to this, my hands have been full. I have finished my second pass and successfully trimmed the article by more than 25%, bringing it down to less than 10,000 words. I think this has helped a lot to keep to the most essential information. Let me know if there's anything else to do and how to proceed further with this review. :) Grnrchst (talk) 14:32, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grnrchst: Great job! It looks more like an article now and less like a biography book. I will start reviewing the body of the article. Could you meanwhile try to trim the lead? Word count is 522 while WP:TOOBIG mentions 400 for the lead and "usually be no longer than four paragraphs". Edwininlondon (talk) 06:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:53, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:

Body

Phew. Taking a break. More later. Edwininlondon (talk) 15:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Onwards, we go:

  • From Buffalo, she moved --> this paragraph can probably be cut by at least a third
  • the McNamaras --> they need some sort of intro e.g. bombing suspects
  • From an early age, Voltairine de Cleyre despised --> de Cleyre despised
  • instead upholding a peaceful approach to anarchism --> well, this summary should mention what was earlier given as "as she increasingly began to accept violent methods such as propaganda of the deed."
  • and the establishment of women's self-determination --> maybe help the reader a bit disambiguating: and for the establishment of women's self-determination
  • de Cleyre was a staunch --> De Cleyre was a staunch
  • with the revolt of a flaming ideal." --> MOS:INOROUT Also check the other quotes here
  • It may be good to use this article from the Library of Congress, as there is heavy reliance on Avrich 1978 at the moment. The more other refs the better.
    • I can have a look around for other sources, but Avrich 1978 is invariably going to be the most cited, because this is the only book-length biography on her. I'm sceptical about using the Library of Congress blog post, as it cites this Wikipedia article and was published after I'd already written most of the article. (It even appears to have copied a couple sentences from the final paragraph of the "Final years and death" section word-for-word, using exact phrases that I wrote and were phrased differently by Avrich) So in adding that I'd be concerned about introducing citogenesis. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ah, sorry about that, I hadn't even looked at it, just assumed a certain quality from that source. Definitely not use that indeed. Edwininlondon (talk) 16:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I shall look at the sources next. Edwininlondon (talk) 15:47, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sources:

  • Golder, Lauren J. (2023) seems unused, which is a pitty
  • Presley, Sharon (2005b) also unused
  • Sartwell, Crispin (2005c) also unused

Did a few spotchecks, which all checked out and no sign of copy pasting. Edwininlondon (talk) 09:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cited Presley 2005b and moved the other two to a further reading section. Unfortunately I don't have access to Golder 2023, so wasn't able to use it when writing the article. I also left Sartwell 2005c uncited, because it doesn't really say much about de Cleyre herself, it's more about the artistic movement she was a part of. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:14, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grnrchst: That's it! I believe this article now meets the GA criteria. It took some effort, but well done! I will promote shortly. Edwininlondon (talk) 09:38, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the review! Your comments were very helpful and led to a much improved article. --Grnrchst (talk) 09:49, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Nineteen Ninety-Four guy talk 06:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Voltairine de Cleyre, 1901
Voltairine de Cleyre, 1901
  • Source: Avrich, Paul (1978). An American Anarchist: The Life of Voltairine de Cleyre. Princeton: Princeton University Press. pp. 24–25. ISBN 978-0-691-04657-0.
Improved to Good Article status by Grnrchst (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 43 past nominations.

Grnrchst (talk) 11:42, 25 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: ALTs 0, 2, 4, 6, 7, or 8 are more interesting, and one of them should be chosen. Would have probably got a review sooner if there were fewer hooks to check. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Voltairine_de_Cleyre&oldid=1264870853"