Talk:A Noiseless Patient Spider

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2021 and 18 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Babybear444. Peer reviewers: Yazzymine688, Momo 318.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer review

I like what you included and it adds a lot of context. What was particularly valuable was your inclusion of unremarked background on Whitman's poetry and thought process. I think it creates a much more well-rounded view of him as an author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yazzymine688 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

first draft

i know a lot is missing form this, but i just started it so give me a break, thx in advance :) some things we need: a better info box external links internal links etc.

this hole thing is taken from an essay i wrote, there are no refrences because i just set down, read the poem, and wrote, i did not look at anybody elses stuff. i know that will proboly not be good enough and i guess ill have to make up some later...

do u think it would be ok if i included the poem? i left it out because i figered it would be aginst some rule...

anyway thx for lookin, any help would be gr8 daniel Farrell 21:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite needed

This article needs a complete overhaul. I did some modest cleanup of formatting and overlinking, and broke up an indigestible bolus of a paragraph, but much more rework is needed. Among other things, the article completely neglects the spider behavior called ballooning, which is central to the poem's imagery. Simply web searching "walt whitman ballooning spider" turns up many references to this key concept.

Also, the poem is clearly past copyright expiration, so there is no bar to including the full text of ten lines. I leave further editing to others who may be watching, and may return if I have time to take this further. Reify-tech (talk) 15:04, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Removing Existing Section on Imagery

@Daniel farrel: I agree with @Reify-tech: that this article needs a complete overhaul. While the section on imagery is a valuable and insightful analysis of the poem, I believe the content fits into the category of "original research," and therefore does not belong in a Wikipedia article. I want to thank the contributor of this section, but I believe its omission is for the best. More relevant and objective information should provide the foundation of this article. Babybear444 (talk) 03:39, 8 October 2021 (UTC)