Talk:E. Pauline Johnson: Difference between revisions

	E. Pauline Johnson was one of the Language and literature good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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 December 22, 2006 WikiProject peer review Reviewed December 27, 2006 Peer review Reviewed January 5, 2007 Good article nominee Listed August 10, 2009 Good article reassessment Delisted Current status: Delisted good 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. Indigenous peoples of North America This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America 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.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America ??? This article has not yet received a rating 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. Canada: British Columbia / Vancouver Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia. This article is supported by WikiProject Vancouver (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. Biography 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 has had a peer review which is now archived.

Template:VP Showcase2

I've restored the W. J. Keith quote that was deleted. It seems to help illustrate the differences of opinion mentioned in the "Criticism and Influence" section, and its source is cited, so I don't see how it could be considered not valid. Andrew Sly 22:14, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Siwash Rock is the subject of one of the best of Johnson's Legends of Vancouver collection of stories; the tale is about virtue, and about resolve on its behalf in the face of certain death and the implacable will of the divine. It never occurred to me before reading this article why it was that her monument was near it...or is it? I have it in my head that it's over by Brockton Point, which is on the opposite side of the park...just checked the Wiki page but it and other monuments in the park are not listed, and they're not listed on the Parks Board website page either; nor is there a map, or much in the way of history at that site....hmmmmm....I'll be back.Skookum1 07:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it's at Ferguson Point somewhere, by the restaurant. She reqested to be buried within sight of the rock. Curiously, she also requested that no monument be erected in her honour.Bobanny 09:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

this article is currently undergoing reviews. The original writer used the author/date style, which I formatted according to Wikipedia conventions for Harvard referencing, and it conforms to the WP:MOS as it is. However, everyone, including me, seems to prefer the usual Chicago style, the one with footnotes at the bottom in a "references" section. Seems the smart thing might be to just change it, though it's a faux pas to do that to an existing style without a consensus on the talk page first. Any thoughts? Bobanny 00:37, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking again, Harvard style is also acceptable per WP:MOS. Personally, I do not adore it, but it is acceptable!--Yannismarou 15:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In 2008, Wikipedia is encouraging all editors to use in-text citations (with footnotes following the text), and requires them for articles to be considered for Good or Featured status.--Parkwells (talk) 14:25, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Passes good article status (WP:GA?). Article tag changed, good article list updated (WP:GOOD). Well written, well referenced. →James Kidd (contr/talk/email) 21:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's only one footnote. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 22:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct, however there are several references, see: the references. What are you getting at? →James Kidd (contr/talk/email) 22:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I think changing the refs to footnotes is definately the way to go, not to make it more correct, but because that's what most people apparently prefer on Wikipedia (including me - see above comments). Thanks for the review, James. I still plan on addressing some content issues that were raised in a biography project peer review, and will eventually try for an fac, when I get a chance to go to the library and some extra time. Bobanny 06:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck! Looks like you're on the right track →James Kidd (contr/talk/email) 06:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to tone down some of the theoretical literary criticism style, because this is an encyclopedia article. Also moved Family History to bottom of article, as it should focus on Johnson, rather than the chiefs in her father's family, or her maternal grandfather's alleged cruelty to children. That is not typical of most biographical articles.--Parkwells (talk) 14:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Due to an error on my part, the commemorative stamp image from Canada Post was added to the article without the correct permissions. Today, Canada Post clarified that they can't agree to the Creative Commons GNU Free Documentation License (does this apply to artwork?), since they don't permit commercial use of their stamp images. The copyright term will expire in 2011, at which time the public domain artwork can be reposted to the article.

For reference, the image file was: [File:Pauline Johnson Canada Canadian commerative stamp issued 1961-03-10 celebrating centennary of her birth original file name s000442k.jpg]

The full file link read: [Image:Pauline Johnson Canada Canadian commemorative stamp issued 1961-03-10 celebrating centennary of her birth original file name s000442k.jpg|thumb|right|205px|1961 Canadian postage stamp commemorating Emily Pauline Johnson centennial]

Comments? --HarryZilber (talk) 04:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Pauline Johnson/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of August 10, 2009, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose):

   • Poorly written, clumsy phrasing throughout. Needs a thorough copy-edit. Consider enlisting the help of a member of WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

   b (MoS):

   • The Lead should summarize the entire article and it nowhere near approaches this. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references):

   • We have a mix of citation styles, inline havard style and footnotes. I recommend converting all to footnotes for clarity, using citation templates as appropriate. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

   b (citations to reliable sources):

   • Sources appear to be sufficiently reliable. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

   c (OR):

3. It is broad in its scope.

   a (major aspects):

   b (focused):

   • Long section on family history seems excessive. Consider shortening and merging into her own history. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   • Slight tendency to weasel words at points, should be sorted by thorough copy-edit. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):

   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   • On hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Major contributors and projects will be informed. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
   • OK as no-one has made any efort to address these issues, I am delisting the article. If you disagree with this decision an appeal can be made at WP:GAR. Otherwise if the artcile is improved it may be re-nominated at WP:GAN. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Johnson's poem, At Sunset has been put to music by composer Jeff Enns and recorded by the Canadian Chamber Choir. I'm not sure if this belongs in this article. Does is warrant a new section? Are there other poems of hers that have been put to music? Perhaps if there was an article about her poems, it would fit there?

Here is a link to the recording put to music- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3XLaWyQwqs

Here is a link to the CD that has the song on it- http://www.canadianchamberchoir.ca/buy.html

Please advise. Clerks. (talk) 15:01, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]