Talk:Poetry analysis
Is it valid as an article ?
- I think Poetry appreciation would be a better title. --Deb
- It could be pasted in the article Poetry which is hmm... a little weak ?
- Thanks for the links. I'll come back some more and work on this. I don't care for the Poetry appreciation name. I am planning to add more about scansion, etc. which will make this fit well under the given title.
- What's all this about "valid articles"? The Wikipedia:Literature basic topics page, the only link to this new article, has not been changed since 21 Oct 2002, and no one has objected since to a potential article entitled "How to read a poem". Let us be patient and watch this article grow in length and depth. --KF 21:38 Jan 17, 2003 (UTC)
- That's not about the content.
- Ericd
- Well, as I just tried to point out, there could be / may be / will be more content in the future. I consider it rather hostile towards newcomers to start picking on them the moment they have started to edit something. KF 21:54 Jan 17, 2003 (UTC)
- I do not think poetry appreciation would be a better title, so I've created a page with that title that redirects to this article. A "valid article"?? Why in Hell not? Michael Hardy 19:30 Mar 28, 2003 (UTC)
_________________________________________________________________________________
What a fantastic idea for an article!
It will probably become the most beautiful how to's in the wikipedia.
- How could it not?
- I'm watch this kernal grow.
It's already a top three hit in the search engine. :-)
- If it said 'poetry' it might rank high there too.
What a wonderful birthday present.
- Truth is the enemy of power,
- power is the enemy of Truth,
- Writers and Artists can vanquish lies.
- Against lies, Art has always won.
[User:[Two16]] : childern should eat poems. so too should dictators.
- Who can translate the above for a simple soul such as myself? I don't seem to be particularly good at interpreting poetry, for I would read: My name is Two16. I'm better than the rest of you, and this is how I've acquired the right to be cynical. -- Am I mistaken? Can anyone help me out here? --KF 17:34 Jan 20, 2003 (UTC)
- Maybe rename this "poetry reading", and discuss the practice of reading poetry in public as well as how to do it. more encyclopedic :-) -- Tarquin 17:51 Jan 20, 2003 (UTC)
Poetry reading is usually a noun. There are going to be plenty of how to's in the pedia. There are many books which have been written with that title.
KF I have put a post on your page just before coming here. It reflects poorly on the demenour of wikipedians that new users feel that there is no gentle spirit here. You were right on the feeling of superiority; but, that is reserved for tyrants. The tyrants themselves are too dull to notice: they have no idea. The could not see the error of their ways but soon they shall.
All bracketed material is editor's commentary. _________________________________________________________________________________
What a fantastic idea for an article! (Unqualified approval)
It will probably become the most beautiful how to's in the wikipedia.(defends against those who might trample it.)
- How could it not? (The best writers will all have interest)
- I'm watch this kernal grow. (Like 'all your base are mine' . Kernal is comp sci. The allusion in Nature is seed.)
It's already a top three hit in the search engine. :-)(Its true! And there were writers who said no one would find it)
- If it said 'poetry' it might rank high there too.(Practical advice)
What a wonderful birthday present.----- ( 2nd Wikipedian B.D. Jan 15)
(The next bit is a Revolutionary call to keyboards. It echos the ride of Paul Reveere and allude to your text. It shows the power of Language to the doubters. It is meant to give hope to any wikipedian who has had their view suppressed. It echos the reality of the wikipedia where refactoring of the talk pages insures that NPOV). It is instructive that all those people who hated what I posted were left stunned and silent for much comment. They couln't even find a npov fault in it. Any tyrant in the wikipedia is a Maroon
- Truth is the enemy of power,
- power is the enemy of Truth,
(echos the ride of Paul Reevere in Longfellow's poem)
- Writers and Artists can vanquish lies.
- Against lies, Art has always won.
(Lockdown Sv Rule)
User:Two16 : childern should eat poems. so too should dictators.
(There is a very famous childern's poem How to eat a poem. The final sentence simply means that whenever possible dictators should have to eat their words like the poem which follow does. The effect together was magnificeint. A very harsh poem was placed here afterwards. I removed it after several hours cause its purpose had been served. Writer and Artist can vanquish lies. Find it in the histories. I hope that this make up for any hurt you may have felt.)
First: do not harm the innocents. I am respectfully sorry.
I would just cut and paste the entire text of How to read a poem into the poetry article. --Uncle Ed _________________________________________________________________________________
What's the relevance of including an external link to the biography of Edward Hirsch?
I think "how-tos", especially of this sort, are by their nature too POV to be considered encyclopedic. There are certainly no widely agreed upon facts about how to read a poem. It doesn't hurt to give a historical treatment of how various well-known authors and scholars in the field have suggested reading poems, of how schools have taught it, and perhaps of prime examples. However, every statement should be qualified somehow, not delivered as fact, and the article title must be a noun. This is essential; a noun title, such as "Interpretation of poetry", says that this is an article about interpretation of poetry, while "How to read a poem" suggests that this is a how-to delivering subjective impressions of how a poem should be read, instead of objective impressions of the topic. Derrick Coetzee 10:19, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Wikipedia seems to be loosening its restrictions on non-noun titles with its series of "How-to"s. But, I think the subject of reading poetry is a little simple. That is, to me, anyone who can read can read poetry. I think the article should be on analyzing (or appreciating) poetry, which is a much more complex and deep activity. Even an article on analyzing poetry, though, should be found in Wikibooks and not here. LockeShocke 22:25, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)
Article name
Is Reading poetry less contentious? --Theo (Talk) 19:40, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)