Talk:Lewis Carroll: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:02, 18 February 2020

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lewis Carroll article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 28 days

Lewis Carroll was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 22, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
September 5, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 4, 2009.

Current status: Former good article nominee

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment / Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Top-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Philosophy: Philosophers / Logic Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophers
	Logic

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

University of Oxford High‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Cheshire High‑importance

	Cheshire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cheshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cheshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CheshireWikipedia:WikiProject CheshireTemplate:WikiProject CheshireCheshire
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

England High‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Sexology and sexuality Low‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Children's literature Top‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks you can do:

Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks.

Add {{Portal|Children's literature}} to the See also section of related articles.
Tag the talk pages of related articles with {{WikiProject Children's literature}}
Join WikiProject Children's literature and list yourself as a Participant in the project.
Cleanup: A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.
Deletion discussions: listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature
Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
Rate the Unassessed articles in the Children's literature WikiProject.
References: Add references to Unreferenced BLPs.
Requested articles: Create a requested article on literature
Stubs: Improve a stub-class article

edit

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Mathematics High‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics
High	This article has been rated as High-priority on the project's priority scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Christianity: Anglicanism Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (assessed as Low-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Photography: History High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject History of photography.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Rugby edit

I have added some information to expand this sub-section, please feel free to correct if you find any errors. You can also message me if you have questions. Darwin Naz (talk) 05:34, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Child-friendship controversy

A few weeks ago, I noticed that the quite substantial section headed ‘Controversies and mysteries’ was not reflected in the lede. Since the lede is meant to summarise the article, I appended a short para, referencing the claims about close friendships with children, adding that these claims had also been quite credibly refuted.

This para was deleted by 184.69.174.194 because they felt it was dangerous to use the word ‘pedophile’ without a cite. Since the word ‘paedophilia’ occurs twice in the main text, I would have thought that their critical attention should have been directed on that part of the article. However, I took the point, and replaced it with a short, discreet statement that seemed unexceptionable: Recent speculation about the nature of his relationships with children has foundered on lack of evidence.

This was promptly deleted by Johnuniq with the following comment: It makes no sense to say "Recent" in an article (what does it mean?); is this a summary of text in the article?. Yes, it certainly is a summary of text in the article. That was why I inserted it. And ‘Recent’ just means what it says: the article states that the controversy started to bulk-up in the late 20th century. And by now, the topic has plainly become an inseparable part of any research into this author. If he was quibbling with ‘how recent is recent?’, I could have understood his deletion of that word, but I don't see how it justifies deletion of the whole statement. Valetude (talk) 00:01, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't he say "I like all children, except boys"? I can't remember where or when, but it sounds like him. Se non e vero, e ben trovato Seadowns (talk) 13:01, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alice/Alice Liddell identification issue in opening para

The opening paragraph of the article currently has this sentence

Alice Liddell, daughter of the Dean of Christ Church, Henry Liddell, is widely identified as the original for Alice in Wonderland, though Carroll always denied this.

This doesn't belong in the opening paragraph, it should be with the material relating to the Alice books, if it needs to be in the article at all.

Guyal of Sfere (talk) 18:33, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What you call the ‘opening paragraph’ is the lede section, which is meant to summarise the article as a whole. The issue of Alice’s origins is duly covered in the article, and it is a major debating point, of enduring interest to the public at large. Valetude (talk) 08:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Something about photos

New user ‎User:DarwinGalileiHerschelHuygens is dumping a bunch of sources about photos; many of them are blogs. The actual text they're adding to the article doesn't seem connected to the rest of the section, nor does it convey much from the sources. I am opening this discussion in the hopes that they explain what they're trying to accomplish instead of edit-warring. --JBL (talk) 22:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, of course I don't want to get into an edit war; all I want to do is make an edit.

The external links section contained a link to a site which presented a hoax as if it were an authentic 19th century photograph; specifically, two photos, one of a grown man and the other of a seven-year-old girl, were photoshopped together in such a way that they appear to be inappropriately kissing. My latest edit is an attempt at compromise; I deleted the link to the spurious site, without adding text or sources of my own.

I should add that there are any number of other sources on this article which I do not agree with, but which I have made no attempt to delete. The difference is that they are not based on hoaxes. One is entitled to one's own opinions, but not one's own facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarwinGalileiHerschelHuygens (talk • contribs) 22:56, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your explanation -- I doubt very much that anyone will object to your most recent edit! --JBL (talk) 23:13, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. Unfortunately, someone just restored the link. Again. DarwinGalileiHerschelHuygens (talk) 00:02, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 23:13, 17 February 2020 edit JayBeeEll (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers 28,146 edits →Something about photos ← Previous edit		Revision as of 00:02, 18 February 2020 edit undo DarwinGalileiHerschelHuygens (talk \| contribs) 46 edits No edit summary Next edit →
Line 87:		Line 87:

	:: Thanks for your explanation -- I doubt very much that anyone will object to your most recent edit! --[[User:Joel B. Lewis\|JBL]] ([[User_talk:Joel_B._Lewis\|talk]]) 23:13, 17 February 2020 (UTC)		:: Thanks for your explanation -- I doubt very much that anyone will object to your most recent edit! --[[User:Joel B. Lewis\|JBL]] ([[User_talk:Joel_B._Lewis\|talk]]) 23:13, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

			You're very welcome. Unfortunately, someone just restored the link. Again. [[User:DarwinGalileiHerschelHuygens\|DarwinGalileiHerschelHuygens]] ([[User talk:DarwinGalileiHerschelHuygens\|talk]]) 00:02, 18 February 2020 (UTC)