Talk:To Kill a Mockingbird/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

THemes

none of the themes are actual themes. 143.254.220.253 (talk) 21:54, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

No? What would actual themes be? Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 05:09, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 March 2017

The first edition of To Kill A Mockingbird is 296 pages. Please change the page number from 281 to 296. I understand it is an arbitrary detail, but I haven't found any information suggesting otherwise. Still, I'm unsure; sorry if I've wasted anyone's time. Surrealducks (talk) 22:04, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. You may be right, but I was unable to confirm it during a brief search. Do you have access to a physical copy, by any chance? If so, are you positive it's a first edition? Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 05:01, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

According to Google Books, Lippincott's First Edition copy is 296 pages. I doubt Google Books would be a good source, so if it is necessary I could provide a citation for the book instead. What would the correct course of action be? Surrealducks (talk) 18:44, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on To Kill a Mockingbird. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120314033527/http://doc.renlearn.com/KMNet/R004101202GH426A.pdf to http://doc.renlearn.com/KMNet/R004101202GH426A.pdf

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 22:28, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on To Kill a Mockingbird. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120304064922/http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/DisplayMain.jsp?curTime=1206823317863 to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/DisplayMain.jsp?curTime=1206823317863

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 03:25, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2017

{{edit semi -protected|To Kill a Mockingbird|answered=no}} The last line in the section "CLASS" reads: "The children internalize Atticus' admonition not to judge someone until they have walked around in that person's skin, gaining a greater understanding of people's motives and behavior.[59]"

I suggest the following, or condensed similar, be added after that last sentence: "The final two pages of the book describe the source of Harper Lee's principle as mentioned above. The author thought it important enough to end her story with these words that help explain the principle:

'' , Atticus was in Jem's room, sitting by his bed. He was reading a book. "Is Jem awake yet?" "Sleeping peacefully. He won't be awake until morning." "Oh. Are you sittin' up with him?" "Just for an hour or so. Go to bed, Scout. You've had a long day." "Well, I think I'll stay with you for a while." "Suit yourself," said Atticus. It must have been after midnight, and I was puzzled by his amiable acquiescence. He was shrewder than I, however: the moment I "Whatcha readin'?" I asked. Atticus turned the book over. "Something of Jem's. Called The Gray Ghost." I was suddenly awake. "Why'd you get that one?" "Honey, I don't know. Just picked it up. One of the few things I haven't read," he said pointedly. "Read it out loud, please, Atticus. It's real scary." "No," he said. "You've had enough scaring for a while. This is too-" "Atticus, I wasn't scared." He raised his eyebrows, and I protested: "Leastways not till I started telling Mr. Tate about it. Jem wasn't scared. Asked him and he said he wasn't. Besides, nothin's real scary except in books." Atticus opened his mouth to say something, but shut it again. He took his thumb from the middle of the book and turned back to the first page. I moved over and leaned my head against his knee. "H'rm," he said. "The Gray Ghost, by Seckatary Hawkins. Chapter One..." I willed myself to stay awake, but the rain was so soft and the room was so warm and his voice was so deep and his knee was so snug that I slept. Seconds later, it seemed, his shoe was gently nudging my ribs. He lifted me to my feet and walked me to my room. "Heard every word you said," I muttered. "...wasn't sleep at all, 's about a ship an' Three-Fingered Fred 'n' Stoner's Boy...." He unhooked my overalls, leaned me against him, and pulled them off. He held me up with one hand and reached for my pajamas with the other. "Yeah, an' they all thought it was Stoner's Boy messin' up their clubhouse an' throwin' ink all over it an'..." He guided me to the bed and sat me down. He lifted my legs and put me under the cover. "An' they chased him 'n' never could catch him 'cause they didn't know what he looked like, an' Atticus, when they finally saw him, why he hadn't done any of those things... Atticus, he was real nice...." His hands were under my chin, pulling up the cover, tucking it around me. "Most people are, Scout, when you finally see them." He turned out the light and went into Jem's room. He would be there all night, and he would be there when Jem waked up in the morning. THE END

(FYI - the following is not to be included in the edit proposal above: I corresponded with Harper Lee for eleven years because my grandfather authored the Seckatary Hawkins books which Harper described as her "favorites". More info at ). Seckatary (talk) 17:52, 10 October 2017 (UTC) Seckatary (talk) 17:52, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Also source for FYI statement is Seckatary (talk) 18:36, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

To Kill A Mockingbird suggested addition[edit source]

To Kill A Mockingbird suggested addition[edit source] I have had some kind help recently by an experienced Wikipedia user/editor who has shown me how I may have confused things by putting way too much text in the previous page edit idea. I do not mean to include all the text reproduction of the actual pages of the TKAM book - that is supposed to be for the convenience of anyone reading it who might not have a To Kill A Mockingbird book handy to read and verify what is written about Seckatary Hawkins, etc. The below two lines is all I suggest be added to the current Wikipedia page:

Harper Lee uses principles of one of her favorite childhood authors, Robert F. Schulkers, and the Seckatary Hawkins children’s books ″Stoners Boy″ and ″The Gray Ghost″ to illustrate the moral lesson of the story. ([1]) book, first ed 1960: ″To Kill A Mockingbird″, pages 294, 295, 296

I am quite uneducated in Wikipedia ways, and need detailed help to make sure this is formatted correctly. My idea is to add the above 2 lines to the Wikipedia story line page using the actual text of To Kill A Mockingbird pages 294, 295, 296 as reference or source.

I also have a letter from the author, Harper Lee, which states Seckatary Hawkins books - The Gray Ghost and Stoner's Boy were her childhood favorite books, but I do not know how to use that as another source for this edit suggestion. You can view the two pages of the card/letter here http://tinyimg.io/i/vCUsJku.jpg and here http://tinyimg.io/i/0uUi4mn.jpg

Also, a scan of the first edition To Kill A Mockingbird book signed can be viewed here http://tinyimg.io/i/h8rcGuD.jpg

And a scan of the last pages of To Kill A Mockingbird book can be viewed here http://tinyimg.io/i/4NDqEuk.jpg

Please comment if you have any answers or ideas for me. Ideally, a professional editor might kindly reformat what I wrote so that it is workable for Wikipedia. If any text should be added or deleted, please advise me. Thanks to anyone who can help me put this edit suggestion in the correct format. Seckatary (talk) 14:15, 30 October 2017 (UTC)Seckatary (talk) 13:30, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

First, thank you for being upfront about your conflict of interest. Many people don't bother to do that.

You're citing the first edition of the book itself to support the sentence you want to add, but I'm not clear exactly how that works. Scout mentions the Hawkins books, but that doesn't equate with Lee's using "principles of one of her favorite childhood authors". You appear to be making a leap of logic there. It may well be that you're right, but it's an unwarranted leap nonetheless, as far as Wikipedia is concerned. One of our most basic policies forbids what we call original research.

The handwritten notes from Lee are primary sources. In most contexts, Wikipedia prefers secondary sources. To oversimplify it somewhat, think of it this way: a good Wikipedia article is written not about a topic but rather about what others have written about that topic. If a reliable source has it that the claim you're making about Lee and the Hawkins books is so, then that's something else again. But the claim shouldn't appear first in Wikipedia. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 17:01, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

{{ping}Rivertorch}

Thanks for your thoughts and guidance. I hope I clicked the right thing and this ping gets to you properly. I am not yet sure what happens with various functions.

First, let me explain that my purpose in suggesting this addition is to explain to everyone interested what Seckatary Hawkins is doing stuck in the ending of Harper’s novel. The text appears exactly the same in all editions BTW – estimated by many to be 30 million or more books by now. Since 1960, most readers do not understand anything about that funny name Seckatary, and perhaps think Seckatary Hawkins stories were invented by Harper Lee for this story.

The exact wording that Wikipedia accepts is not all that important, but some explanation is something readers deserve to understand. There have been many newspaper and magazine articles written about these stories and the connection Harper Lee had, even modern day editorials, some of which may serve in the way you describe; however, I am not sure they would satisfy that exact requirement.

The club website, www.seckatary.com has a lot of info too. Click on Harper Lee. Other things Harper has written which may offer some examples of what might be included in an edit of the article – but I need help to determine what that might be. Another book, this one a Seckatary Hawkins The Gray Ghost book signature sentiment may suggest something to consider using in Wikipedia? See it here http://tinyimg.io/i/AbrvA1Z.jpg

I have many letters from Harper from approximately 11 years of being pen pals. I referred 3 “tinyimages/io” in this edit writing, showing one letter where Harper writes the "Seckatary books were her favorites". Also a scan of the TKAM book with signed sentiment Harper sent to my grandpa – the author of Seckatary stories - to illustrate the way she felt about the stories.

In other parts of the Wikipedia article, Chas Shields “Mockingbird” biography of Harper Lee is cited by someone – well, Shields includes statements about Harper and Seckatary Hawkins on pages 46 and 51 which might serve as the needed secondary source? see those pages here http://tinyimg.io/i/vKPXAkz.jpg Thanks for the help. Seckatary (talk) 18:35, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

I added the link to a scan of Chas Shields book pages referred to. http://tinyimg.io/i/vKPXAkz.jpg Seckatary (talk) 19:09, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

@Rivertorch: (for procedural sake, as Seckatary's was incorrectly typed). If anyone is interested in reading the discussion leading up to this post, please see here. Anarchyte (work | talk) 05:53, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Anarchyte. @Seckatary: I'm not sure what else to tell you. The observations you've made about Harper Lee and your grandfather are interesting and probably deserving of publication, but I don't think Wikipedia is the place for them. Let me expand just a little on what I said above. Our articles' content is based on what independent, secondary sources say. Primary sources may be cited as sources only for certain basic facts, and original research is never permissible. Quoting from the policy, original research "includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources".

What I would do, if I were you, is get in touch with one or more people who have written published articles about Lee or To Kill a Mockingbird. These could be academics, magazine writers or whatever, as long as the articles weren't self-published but rather are accessible through a reputable source. There must be a lot of such people, especially with the renewed interest sparked by the novel's sequel. If you can get one of them interested in what you're saying, perhaps they might write something that gets published in a source that we can use here. That's all very speculative and indirect, I realize, but these are the rules the Wikipedia community has set forth to ensure that what we say in articles is verifiable, neutral in tone, and free of undue weight, personal biases, and so on.

That's my take on it, anyway. Perhaps someone else will weigh in. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 16:56, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

........................................................................................................

Thanks, Anarchyte. {{ping}Rivertorch}

Thanks for explaining. Well, “Rules is rules” as they say, and I will abide by them. But is there any change in wording that might be acceptable and supported by the Shields biography book I cited? Did you get a chance to see the Charles Shields Mockingbird biography pages I referred to you in my last post /edit? (http://tinyimg.io/i/vKPXAkz.jpg)? I was hoping the underlined text in those pages would give some secondary evidence such as you describe as necessary for Wikipedia. (I neglected to include the associated following page 47 of that bio which is here: http://tinyimg.io/i/kYrZcsM.jpg For your ease of reference, the underlined parts of those pages are as follows:

p46:  “…  The Rover Boys, written by Edward Stratemeyer, was a favorite series, despite the stories’ ridiculously stilted dialogue – ‘Hello, you fellows!’ shouted a voice behind the Rover boys.  ‘Plotting mischief?’  At least they featured a girlfriend-sidekick named Nellie. A better choice, in Nelle's opinion, was the Seckatary Hawkins books by Robert Schulkers.”  The series is centered on a boys’ club on the Kentucky River, the plots usually revolve around a suspicious new boy, slandered by rumor or blamed without evidence, who later comes out on top by dint of his character.  He seems to embody the club’s motto, ‘Fair and Square.’ ‘When we were too young to read, Brother, who was a voracious reader’, Nelle said, ‘would read many, many stories to us.  Then we’d dramatize the stories in our own ways, and Truman would always provide the necessary comic relief to break up the melodrama.  P47: “Later, when Nelle was old enough to read the Seckatary Hawkins series on her own, she wrote to the publisher requesting a club membership form.  In her childish handwriting, she signed the pledge: ‘I shall always be fair and square, possessed with strength of character, honest with God and my friends, and in later life, a good citizen.’48  Sometimes her ideals were tested:…”

P51: “…Most children probably would have begun by creating original fairy tales. But an invasion of fairies in down-and-out Monroeville seemed far-fetched. Anyway, the two friends’ favorite books, the Seckatary Hawkins series, were about the adventures of a boy’s club on the banks of the Kentucky River. That wasn’t much different from their home-town. Why couldn’t Monroeville – their neighborhood, in fact – do just as well for a setting? This would also dovetail with another of their favorite activities – people watching. They knew more about Doc Waters, the dentist, and his family across the street, for instance, than they ever would know about trolls and so on.”

Perhaps the following change in wording would work for Wikipedia?: For the ending of ″To Kill A Mockingbird″ - pages 294 through 296, Harper Lee uses direct quotes from her favorite childhood books, The Seckatary Hawkins series: ″Stoners Boy″ and ″The Gray Ghost″, by Robert Schulkers, to illustrate the principles of the pledge she made when she joined the Fair and Square Club as a child: “I shall always be fair and square, possessed with strength of character, honest with God and my friends, and in later life, a good citizen.”

In the above example, I tried to include only things stated in the Shields book excerpts. If I have erred in any part, please suggest how I might reword it to be acceptable to Wikipedia. Sorry to be such a bother, but as I explained to my other Wiki helper, Anarchite, I am 75 and the procedures and rules for making entries and statements is really going over my head. I am frustrated, but learning more and more as you and others help me and suggest things; but I am still far away from being capable at this. I will contact some of the writers who have contacted me for information in the past and see what they can do, but I feel I will need to give them exact wording of what to write, or the result might still not be what is needed here. So please give me some detailed suggestions if you can. I am not complaining, I truly appreciate all the time you have taken with me so far. Seckatary (talk) 20:12, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm dubious about your latest proposed addition. Based on the wording in the letter, as I read it, the most that can accurately be said is that Lee said in a letter to you that these two books were her favorites among a group of books her brother had given her. That's not the same as saying they were her favorite childhood books. We can't use the letter anyway, so maybe it's a moot point. Similarly, you say that she used the direct quotes to illustrate the principles. Really? Can we be sure of that? I don't see it. In any event, the precise wording isn't at issue here; the lack of reliable secondary sources is. If such sources don't exist, then we can assume that at the present time there is no scholarly consensus that the topic is noteworthy. That doesn't mean it's uninteresting or that it seems irrelevant to fans of the novel, but it does mean that Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, is selective about what aspects of a topic it covers.

Yes, Wikipedia has a learning curve. Please read Help:Talk pages, especially the part about indenting. Just for future reference, by the way, the "ping" function requires a pipe symbol, not an end-parenthesis, and two end-curly brackets, not one: {{ping|username}} not {{ping)username}. (You don't really need to ping me again for this, though. I'll keep an eye out, but I'm going to back off and let others weigh in, if they care to.) Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 21:43, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

............................................................................................................

I did remember that the rules preclude using Harper Lee’s letters as proof, so I did not do that. I was using the details of Shields' “Mockingbird” book for my response. As I stated in yesterday’s edit: “In the above example, I tried to include only things stated in the Shields' book text. If I have erred in any part, please suggest how I might reword it to be acceptable to Wikipedia.”

I retyped all the relevant text from Shields “Mockingbird” book for your convenience in comparing for yourself what I wrote in that regard. Shields' book, “Mockingbird" states Seckatary Hawkins books are Harper’s favorite books, RE: P51: “…Anyway, the two friends’ favorite books, the Seckatary Hawkins series, were about the adventures of a boy’s club on the banks of the Kentucky River.”

Also - my choice of “direct quotes” was not to infer that Harper used quotes of independent statements made by the author of Seckatary stories. Rather, it was an attempt to illustrate there are several "The Gray Ghost" story events summarized by Scout which have some association with principles expressed within TKAM. You may have been more understanding of my meaning had you read "The Gray Ghost" and "Stoner’s Boy" books . So perhaps a revision in wording might be:

For the ending of ″To Kill A Mockingbird″ - pages 294 through 296, Harper Lee uses summations of situations found in one of her favorite childhood books - The Seckatary Hawkins series, ″The Gray Ghost″, by Robert Schulkers - to illustrate the principles of the pledge she made when she joined the Fair and Square Club as a child: “I shall always be fair and square, possessed with strength of character, honest with God and my friends, and in later life, a good citizen.”

I am willing to make any changes necessary to render this acceptable. So if you or someone can help with the wording selection in the way it should read, please do help. I hope some others will make comments too. ThanksSeckatary (talk) 00:18, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on To Kill a Mockingbird. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070920194633/http://www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/100rivallist.html to http://www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/100rivallist.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 20:29, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Seckatary Hawkins novels

At User talk:Seckatary, Seckatary has provided some sources discussing how To Kill a Mockingbird was inspired (in part) by the Seckatary Hawkins novels. I'm not familiar with Garden & Gun, but the Ohio Valley History looks reliable enough to me. We already obliquely refer to the books in the "Loss of innocence" section, but the "Southern life and racial injustice" section may be a better fit. Also, the sources focus more on the Secktary Hawkins novels, so we may use them to improve that article, which is in pretty bad shape. Huon (talk) 21:06, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

@Huon: I have no opinion, and I don't have time to review these sources now. I just want to make sure you're aware of the first two threads on this talk page. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 18:24, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

I am aware of those, but by now we have some reliable sources that could indeed be used to add something to the article that's currently not covered. The other threads in my mind are no reason to reject Seckatary's efforts out of hand. Huon (talk) 18:30, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

I agree completely. It was a heads-up, just in case. Thanks! Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 18:39, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@Huon: Another source that may be of use for the favorite books assertion is the Barnes & Noble statement reported in this article:. In section 7, it says: "According to BarnesandNoble.com, their favorite books were Sherlock Holmes mysteries, The Rover Boys series and adventure stories by Seckatary Hawkins." Seckatary (talk) 17:07, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't think that's a useful reference for this article (since it doesn't say much about To Kill a Mockingbird), and I doubt it's reliable either, particularly since the very quote you give here is factually wrong. Huon (talk) 17:48, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

No, I do not think it is obvious, although your use of the adjective "bleeding" tends to confirm the pro-British, anti-American linguistic bias of the Wikipedia censors (oops, I mean moderators). An example that comes to mind is "Gone With The Wind," which makes reference to Clayton County, Georgia, a real place, but includes various fictional elements within it. Further, unless a person has memorized the names of the Alabama counties, whether one of them is known as Maycomb is not likely to be known.John Paul Parks (talk) 17:04, 20 February 2018 (UTC) No, I do not think it is obvious, unless you think the average reader of Wikipedia has memorized the names of the Alabama counties. Another example in literature is "Gone With The Wind," which makes reference to Clayton County, Georgia, a real place, but incorporates various fictitious elements within it.John Paul Parks (talk) 17:46, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that as one of the most notable books of all time with thousands upon thousands of people, including English teachers since it is used for class reading assignments, having read this article without feeling the need to add that the county is fictional as well, probably best to leave it alone. Gandydancer (talk) 18:04, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Well, thanks to all who made comments, but now what happens? I started this project thinking I would ask for help from more accomplished moderators who would correct and place a short statement in the To Kill A Mockingbird Wikipedia section from the comments. I do not know how to do that. Will someone please read and correct what has come before today, and add either my last effort of a few lines - or something else - to Wikipedia - or tell me what to do to accomplish that myself.Seckatary (talk) 13:49, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

As above ... without feeling the need to add that the county is fictional as well, probably best to leave it alone. ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones ^{The Welsh Buzzard} ‑ ‑ 14:23, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Bibliography

I changed the section to a subsection. This is a relatively minor adjustment but as a section this title is usually placed first in the appendixes related to biographies or named "Works or publications", "Discography", or "Filmography" per MOS:BIB. Using a separate source related "Bibliography" section is confusing, appears to be out of place, and follows a small number of like articles. We commonly practice placing related subjects in a subsection (hierarchy) so it seems appropriate to follow this with source links (generally listed), and links providing inline text-source integrity, that combined form the citations.

• Multiple dictionaries give the definitions of bibliography:
  • 1)-"A list of the books of a specific author or publisher, or on a specific subject. ("a bibliography of his publications")". This is commonly placed in a "Works" section (for biographies only) per MOS/layout, but also common as a "Bibliography" section, and not related to sourcing.
  • 2)- "A list of the books referred to in a scholarly work, usually printed as an appendix."

It is recommended in MOS:BIB that "Bibliography" not be used concerning "Works" of an author but it is commonly used. As a subsection of "References" there is no confusion it is source related. Otr500 (talk) 22:44, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2019

Hi, would you replace File:Mimus polyglottus1 cropped.png with File:Mimus polyglottos adult 02 cropped.jpg? "02 cropped" is used at the top of the Northern mockingbird article. If it's the best image to use in that prominent place, it's good to use in this article. 208.95.51.53 (talk) 14:54, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

 Not done for now: This article is also a featured article. Please feel free to establish a positive consensus. Izno (talk) 00:39, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Some information may not be necessary

While reading this article I have found that the "Adaptations" section of this article may not be necessary. This addition to the article takes away from the conciseness of the article and doesn't add any information to the point of the article which is about the book. As the access to the information on both the film and play adaptations is linked at the beginning of the article it would be nonessential to include an entire section dedicated to this information.Jmurrell123 (talk) 04:13, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I have removed & adjusted the section headings, but I consider the copy to be essential. Cheers!
Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 11:47, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2020

• 1. Change 'in an unexpected manner' to 'unexpectedly'.
• 2. Change 'walking home on a dark night' to 'walking home on at night'.
• 3. Change 'The origin of Tom Robinson is less clear, although many have speculated that his character was inspired by several models.' to 'The origin of Tom Robinson is less clear, although many have speculated that several models inspired his character.'
• 4. Change 'the narrative technique of flashback to play intricately with perspectives.' to 'the narrative technique of flashback to playing intricately with perspectives.'
• 5. Change 'that general readers seem to feel' to 'those general readers seem to feel'
• 6. Change ' fathers are another theme in the novel.' to ' fathers are other themes in the novel.' Shefalisri (talk) 06:16, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

To editor Shefalisri:  Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. I would like to inform you that To Kill a Mockingbird has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Art has been rated as FA-Class. So to make any changes you must establish a consensus first. Thank you. -ink&fables «talk» 15:50, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Justice for Mayella

In this book, we have a very good attorney cross-examining a rape victim in a way that would never be allowed in today's US courtrooms. It is astonishingly abusive to an modern enlightened person. It is in fact ILLEGAL now. To be blunt, Atticus accuses her of inviting Tom Robinson to fuck her. "She tempted a Negro" is the line in the closing that sticks out to me, slut-shaming her and accusing her of "jungle fever", to use the phrase popularized by Spike Lee. Scout, no doubt a very reliable 6 year old reporter, thinks Tom could not have beat Mayella on the right side of her face, since his opposing [left] hand was crippled in a cotton gin. That is the only evidence in his favor. I invite you to approach your next victim from the rear and beat her with YOUR right hand; your punches will land on the RIGHT side of her head. Why did we all think Tom was innocent when Harper NEVER SAID HE WAS? 75.127.149.162 (talk) 07:19, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Inclusion of new sources

The inclusion of new and updated sources is essential to give a better understanding of the implications of the novel in the 21st century. There needs to be more scholarly articles from 2010 and onward written preferably by BIPOC scholars. Most of the sources cited are by white scholars.Yc7718 (talk) 17:41, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Context for above comment: Yc7718 is evaluating this article as part of Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Georgetown University/WRIT 015-13 -- Writing and Culture (Fall 2021). Schazjmd (talk) 18:19, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, Schazjmd. Yc7718 should be made aware that the little bronze star at the top of the article indicates it's rated a WP:Featured article, and as such follows the Wikipedia:Featured article criteria. That said, it was written a decade ago. Is the comment asking editors to provide new sources, which is a very big ask since the original author no longer edits Wikipedia, or just a general comment to satisfy an assignment? Victoria (tk) 19:02, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

"Il buio oltre la siepe" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Il buio oltre la siepe and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 24#Il buio oltre la siepe until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:48, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Disputed removal of ref, wikilink, and wording

This removal of a scholarly academic RS by Gareth Griffith-Jones was accompanied by an odd edit summary: "We do not have references in Plot Summaries". I have never seen any PAG like that. Please point me to it. Also, there was no need to remove the helpful wikilink and added words "right in front of the prison guards". Here is the relevant part, with the removed content in bold:

Tom is shot 17 times and killed while trying to [[suicide by cop|escape from prison]] right in front of the prison guards.<ref name="Temple_2/17/2015">{{cite journal | last=Temple | first=Kathryn | title=What's Old Is New Again: William Blackstone's Theory of Happiness Comes to America | journal=[[The Eighteenth Century: Theory and Interpretation]] | volume=55 | issue=1 | date=Spring 2014 | issn=1935-0201 | pages=129–134 | url=https://www.academia.edu/10873599/Whats_Old_is_New_Again_William_Blackstones_Theory_of_Happiness_Comes_to_America | access-date=July 26, 2022 | quote=Tom Robinson, the black man falsely charged with rape, commits what some call 'suicide by cop,' attempting to escape from prison under circumstances that assure his death. p. 131 }}</ref>'''

The article is poorer for this deletion. Why do it? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:14, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Article is full of opinions

This article is awful. Its full of opinions. Nowhere in law text does the term 'racial justice' appear. Mark this article as opinion and take it off any features immediately. 2601:1C2:1700:31E0:2C56:51AC:9353:B78E (talk) 17:33, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

You fail to understand the purpose of Wikipedia. We document the sum total of human knowledge as it's found in reliable sources. That includes facts, opinions, scandals, lies, conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, etc. Opinions about the book and its subjects are very much on-topic. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:48, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

BS. I dont fail to do anything. This should be facts, not just one writers opinion on whats called 'social justice' that doesn't even exist in law. 2600:100F:B11F:5EC8:74A6:C862:4842:A986 (talk) 22:38, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

??? You need to be specific. Which writer's opinion and which source? So far you haven't referred to any policies that are violated. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 23:43, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your point is. Nowhere in the article does "racial justice" appear either, although "racial injustice" shows up. If you have a better term to use to describe the novel's theme, please suggest it. And yes, it's full of opinions. Those opinions reflect accurately how the novel is viewed by American society, which is a valid subject for this article. I'm not sure how you feel this article should be written, so if you have a different approach, please suggested it. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 02:35, 6 September 2022 (UTC)