Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Raymond Chandler bibliography/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Raymond Chandler bibliography edit

Raymond Chandler bibliography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 21:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Raymond Chandler was an excellent author who struggled initially with writing in the 'hard-boiled' style for which he is best known. This list has been re-written with new material added, and all constructive,comments are welcome. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 21:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Only two, very minor comments, both to do with the lead section:

  • "British-American" – I see from the main Chandler article that he took British nationality in 1907. If that means that he was hitherto an American citizen, I think perhaps British-American would be better switched round to American-British, though the point is not of great importance.
  • For the Williams quote in the final sentence of the introduction, I think the prose would flow more smoothly if you moved the opening quotation marks three words to the right, beginning the direct quote with "a touchstone..".

That's all I can find to throw in. Clear, well laid out, thoroughly sourced and referenced, and doubtless comprehensive. Happy to support promotion. Tim riley talk 15:09, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Tim. Your suggestions happily adopted. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 21:06, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley

  • Looks fine. A few minor comments.
  • Why no pictures? There is the photo in the article on him and a (small) commons category on him.
  • The pic on the article is a non-free one, so we can't use it. The two images on Commons are of a house and blue plaque, which doesn't really illuminate readers. I'll have a look at Double Indemnity images, but we're moving away from the books a bit with those. - SchroCat (talk) 11:22, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that a bit more on his early background would be helpful, particularly his travels. For example "Born in Chicago, Illinois, he was educated at Dulwich College from 1900." seems a non-sequitur.
  • Is it worth commenting on the change in his output - poems and essays up to 1912 but almost none thereafter?
  • I didn't come across any explanation for it, but I'll dig through the sources again to see if there is something interesting in there we can use. - SchroCat (talk) 11:22, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • How does this look now? - SchroCat (talk) 12:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am uneasy about having writings by and about him in the same section. I would suggest splitting the first section in two.
  • Is this in the Miscellany section? All the works there are by him, even if edited by others. The Raymond Chandler's Philip Marlowe work does contain more of other people's work than Chandler's, but there is an original work in there. Are there any in particular that you feel would be best removed? - SchroCat (talk) 11:22, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I meant "Publications in periodicals and newspapers". Some of the interviews such as "Raymond Chandler Talks of James Bond" and "A Confession by Raymond Chandler" sound as if they were written by a journalist who interviewed Chandler. If he was interviewing someone else, this should be made clear. Dudley Miles (talk) 12:00, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah, OK. All those interviews are listed in the main source, so I'm a little uncomfortable excluding them (it feels like we're applying too much editorial judgement if we exclude). What I've done to clarify the matter is to state that RC was interviewd by a journalist, which should at least clear up the matter in people's minds. These interviews should be mostly RC's words, even if interspersed with any background provided by the journo. Does this sound OK? - SchroCat (talk) 13:04, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well on that point I disagree. I cannot see that it is exercising too much editorial judgment to arrange material differently. I think it would be better to have a separate section for (say) "Interviews with Chandler". The comments quoted would have been chosen by the writer, and might have quoted him inaccurately or misleadingly. Of course as you are now making this clear in the notes it is a minor point. Dudley Miles (talk) 13:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK - I've split the interviews out into a second table in that section. Does that work OK? - SchroCat (talk) 14:00, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • No change needed, but is there any evidence that he knew Wodehouse? Dudley Miles (talk) 11:03, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure they did, but I do hope so. Odd though it may seem, there are some similarities between theirphrasing from time to time! - SchroCat (talk) 11:22, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many thanks Dudley. I'll work on some extra text to add to the background. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 11:22, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks again Dudley Miles. I've addressed your points again, and added new material. Please let me know your thoughts. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:04, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support. A fine article. Dudley Miles (talk) 13:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks again Dudley Miles. As per the above, I've split the interviews out into a second table in that section, which should be better. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 14:00, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Review by PresN
  • I... have nothing. That's a complete first, for me; I guess you've gotten these bibliographies down cold now. Support, and as I did a source review in an attempt to find something to complain about, also Source Review passed. --PresN 19:38, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • LOL! Many thanks PresN – much appreciated. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 20:43, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I just want you to make the following three edits please:
    1. "I'll Be Waiting" was published in October (not December).
    2. "The Bronze Door" was published in the Unknown (magazine).
    3. Link San Diego Evening Tribune to The San Diego Union-Tribune to avoid that glaring red link.

--Cheetah (talk) 02:40, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Many thanks Crzycheetah! All now sorted. The Tribune wasn't a red link when I wrote this, and I see the page was deleted for what I always think is the weakest of reasons: it was created by a blocked user. Your suggested link works admirably tho. Many thanks indeed. Cheers – Gavin (talk) 07:21, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, even though I supported this, since someone else has also supported, SchroCat can't promote his own list, and no one else is available, I'm going to close this as promoted. --PresN 03:42, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Raymond_Chandler_bibliography/archive1&oldid=1138488704"