Talk:Emily Hale

January 2020

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 22:41, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Emily Hale at Phillips Academy in 1956

• ... that T.S. Eliot defended himself from the grave after 1,131 of his letters to Emily Hale (pictured) were released in January 2020, posthumously stating "I never at any time had sexual relations with Miss Hale"? Source: Washington Post, New York Times, The Guardian

Created by Js229 (talk) and Britishfinance (talk). Nominated by Britishfinance (talk) at 01:43, 7 January 2020 (UTC).

• Now that’s interesting! The hook is just shy of 200 characters. No citation issues. The prose is long enough with neutrality. It’s new enough and the image has no issues. All you need is QPQ. ⌚️ (talk) 13:51, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks Trillfendi. I thought this would be interesting (and is getting wide press coverage). I have less than 5 DYKs, so I think it should be okay for QPQ? Britishfinance (talk) 13:55, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

• I have added the missing (and required) question mark at the end of the hook, which puts it at 199 characters, and "(pictured)" as well, though given the damage to the image, I can't recommend its use. Britishfinance is correct, in that no QPQ is required for nominators who have fewer than five prior DYK credits (and I only see one for them). However, Trillfendi, if a QPQ were outstanding, an approval tick should not be given since there's still something that needs to be done before the nomination can be promoted; instead, the "?" icon is what's appropriate when a QPQ needs to be supplied. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:45, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Early Life and Career

This sentence needs some work: "...a speech and drama teacher at various women-only colleges, including Simmons University (1916–1921), Milwaukee-Downer College (1921–1928), Scripps College (1932–1934),[3][6] Smith College (1936–1942), Phillips Academy (1950s), and at the Abbot Academy (late 1950s).[2][1][3][6]"

Per Wikipedia's own (linked) page on Phillips, Phillips Academy is neither a college (it's a high-school) nor women-only. In fact, when Hale taught there (50s), it was all boys. It became co-educational in 1973. I'll take a stab at editing it, hopefully without making the sentence too convoluted. LeftyAce (talk) 05:15, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks LeftyAce for that – much appreciated. Britishfinance (talk) 14:11, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Emily Hale/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Oulfis (talk · contribs) 06:54, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to take this on as my first GA review! I will work my way through the following checklist as I am able.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comment: Oulfis, just checking in since it's been a month since your last edit here. Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 07:32, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Review abandoned

As Oulfis has edited on two different days after the above ping and has note responded, I think we have to consider this review abandoned, since it hasn't been edited since the day it was opened a month and a half ago. Pinging Kingsif, to see whether they would be willing to take over the abandoned review. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:20, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Kingsif, BlueMoonset, my apologies for disappearing, and for not communicating appropriately. As you've detected, I found myself both forgetting about and oddly overwhelmed by the review; it is a relief for someone else to take it over. My sincerest thanks for stepping in to make sure it still takes place. ~ oulfis 🌸(talk) 03:51, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

New review

Happy to take over @BlueMoonset:. Also pinging @Britishfinance: so they're aware.

The article is generally great, well-written. I notice that Oulfis also left a comment at the talkpage about the 'narrative' of the article. I think I agree; this is a style concern, not a coverage one. While I expect more coverage will come, this is what there is for now and that's acceptable. Reading the Relationship and Letter archive sections, it is not Hale-centric, it reads more like a story in the life of Eliot, so perhaps these parts can be tweaked. The rest of the style looks fine.

•  Done, tweaked this a little more. The core issue here is that we are missing the story from Hale's view (Eliot, somewhat nastily, burnt all of her letters to him, so we really only have his side of the story via his letters to her). I suspect that as his letters to her get analyzed, more of her story will emerge, and there has already been one biography of her produced. I suspect, given how big Eliot is as a subject, that several more biographies on her will emerge. Britishfinance (talk) 11:13, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Sources are strong, but there are some statements missing an inline citation - I'm sure you can find them without a template, so I haven't added them - though sources support them. I also think the two sources with an Amazon url as the main url should have this converted to ASIN, instead, as the main url usually links to where the whole book can be read.

•  Done, fixed those inlines, and replaced the Amazon url with the Google Books url, so hope that works? Britishfinance (talk) 11:13, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

There doesn't appear to be any copyvio, though a check shows that there is perhaps too heavy quoting from some sources. If this could be cut back, it would be better.

•  Done, because this is a short article, and her story is still emerging, I was conscious of wanting to ensure that general statements about her were sourced to notable biographers, and/or academics covering her story, and I felt using their quotes were important to show the NPOV of this. I think this is a good idea for now, and the quotes are not too long? Britishfinance (talk) 11:13, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Infobox is useful, image meets requirements. No other illustration needed. The talk page and history suggest this article is nice and stable.

on hold - perhaps some tweaking, some inline citations to be added, otherwise strong. Kingsif (talk) 22:35, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Kingsif and appreciate you taking this on. Have made some changes above from your comments, and hope that works. Britishfinance (talk) 11:13, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Passing this, though maybe more details on her plays in later life if it's available would be nice. Kingsif (talk) 16:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you :) Britishfinance (talk) 19:28, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Article more about the letters than Hale?

Overall this is a fascinating and excellent article, but as I re-read it, it feels more like a an article about the letter archive than about Hale herself. Since this is the main way she is notable, it makes sense for the letters to make up most of the article, but the "narrative arc" could still centre on her. I think adding a section on "Later life and death" before the letter archive, and something about her literary afterlife (like her presence in Eliot biographies, and the novel inspired by her) as the last section, would help prevent Eliot from 'taking over' the article. I've done some preliminary searching so I may make these changes myself (after I've had a good night's sleep, since I'm currently wiki-ing into the wee hours irresponsibly....), but I make the suggestion in case others also want to think about this aspect of the article. ~ oulfis 🌸(talk) 07:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I also fell in love with this story as I stumbled across it (and then expanded it). I have scoured the main books on Eliot and the biographical facts presented here on Hale are all I could find. Once she leaves Eliot's orbit, she is almost forgotten. Obviously, the release of the letters is going to see much larger works done on her, but most probably again through the lens of the greater understanding the letters will give on her relationship, and influence, on Eliot's works (which Eliot was determined to erase from his own history). It will take 12-24 months for such works to be released (the letters are being analysed daily by Eliot academics), and by then, we will have the material for a WP:FAC (in my view). An ultimately tragic tale (a fate that met many women associated with Eliot), however, I can see a Hollywood film coming from this when the full letters are known. Britishfinance (talk) 10:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Been able to expand this a little more and add a "Life after Eliot" section. Britishfinance (talk) 13:04, 22 April 2020 (UTC)