Talk:Those Winter Sundays

Poem

I added the last two lines of the poem in the section "style", Can I do it easily like that or I have to cite some sources?Leozanoni (talk) 16:29, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Educational Project

Application for course page currently pending on Wikipedia:Education noticeboard Limelightangel (talk) 11:12, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Permissions granted

Here's the permission for publishing the poem (email by the permissions managers of W.W. Norton & Company, Inc)

Thank you for your email. We have no objections to your request, but we ask that, in addition to the title and author, you please credit the publisher, Liveright Publishing Corporation.

Best regards,

Robert Shatzkin

Permissions Manager

W.W. Norton & Company, Inc

500 5th Avenue

New York, NY 10110

Leozanoni (talk) 16:48, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

@Leozanoni: This is insufficient, as it is possible for anyone to simply write a block of text claiming that it is an email from a proper authority. Per WP:Donating copyrighted material, the copyright owner will need to send an email from an address that can be verified to belong to the publisher to the Wikimedia foundation (instructions at the linked policy page) to grant permission. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:48, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: Hello. We have sent an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org to notify them of the permission granted status. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leti1218 (talk • contribs)

@Leti1218: That's well and good, but the email has to come from WW Norton & Company, the copyright owners. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:35, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Permission declined

Norton do not agree to Wikipedia's terms of the copyright permission, I think the most we can do is as we did and insert parts of the poem. Here is the email: Dear Leonardo,

Thank you for your email. Unfortunately, we cannot agree to those terms.

Best regards,

Robert Shatzkin Permissions Manager W.W. Norton & Company, Inc 500 5th Avenue New York, NY 10110 Leozanoni (talk) 15:10, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Use of Categories

This draft page needs putting in relevant and acceptable Categories. Limelightangel (talk) 12:02, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

In which category should be added a comperison with the Song "Color Him Father"? Lollo.125!! (talk) 16:05, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

I've removed two bullet points in the category popular culture because they don't fit in this category, the first one was as above mentioned about the comparison to the song 'Color him father' and the second one was about the fact that Those Winter Sundays is mentioned as a poem which can easily be understood for the reason that it can be compared to one's own life.

I removed the first one because it doesn't fit any category in our article and the second points is really subjective.

Formatting

Shall we write Those Winter Sundays always in Italic or normal? Glueck21 (talk)

What do you think about a picture of the "good shepherd"

I think it is a pretty good idea, next to the Symbol section Glueck21 (talk) 12:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

We maybe should add a reference for the title section, what do you think about it?Glueck21 (talk) 12:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

There is still a reference missing for the Section "Title" who wrote this? Can you please add one? Glueck21 (talk) 13:51, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Images

I put an image of the auhtor, I got it from wiki commons but I don't really like it.. any advice also on how to choose the size? What do you think about a picture of the "good shepherd" on style section.. there are a lot of them on wiki commons on this link https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Jesus_Christ_as_the_Good_Shepherd Leozanoni (talk) 18:45, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I added the image of "the Good Shepherd" in the symbol section, I found it in wiki commons. What do you think about it? Can we keep it like that or do you have any suggestion to add a better one? Thank you for your help. Lollo.125!! (talk)

Is anyone able to help me to get the new picture of Robert Hayden a little bit more up, so that it is directly next to the History of the authorship?Glueck21 (talk) 11:24, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Reference

Hello I think there is a Reference Problem in the Section Structure, can you please look for the right reference? Glueck21 (talk) 13:59, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Help

Hello. Our page has been declined, mainly due to the absence of the entire poem, we have sent another email to the copyright owners of the poem. Does anyone have any other advice on how to make our page ready for submission? Leti1218 (talk) 12:31, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

There is no requirement that the entire poem be repeated in this article. Rather the opposite in fact. You may not put copyrighted material into the encyclopedia. It is not easy reading, but unfortunately, all copied material must meet our guidelines on non-free content. This includes the use of royalty free/non-commercially licensed material and/or material with accompanying permissions such as the one above. Edaham (talk) 10:35, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Article trimming and editing

The sections

• themes
• symbols
• style

Seem undue. They should be condensed into a line or two and put into a section on the poem’s contents.

Some suggested section titles might be

• History
  • Brief history of its authorship
  • Publishing information
  • Mention of th body of works to which it belong
• Content
  • Structure (brief explanation of the rhyme and meter etc)
  • Meaning of the poem (keep it brief)
  • An important line or two to demonstrate the above
• Appearances in other media (Film, television, etc)

Avoid: Excessive synopsis on either the meaning of the poem or its relevance to the author. Besides being undue, subjective opinions require attribution and allowing the opinions of a scholarly writer to flow freely through an article EVEN IF SOURCED, is not good for the reader, especially if we use Wikipedia’s “voice” to say them, because it gives a reader the idea that the information comes from scholarly consensus on the subject rather than the writings of an individual author.

Edaham (talk) 08:27, 5 December 2018 (UTC) Thank you for your answer. But I do not get this point "Mention of th body of works to which it belong". Can you pls tell me what you mean with this?Glueck21 (talk) 13:19, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Feedback

This is what the user who declined our page answered to my questions, please take a look (especially if you did few edits).

"I reviewed Draft:Those Winter Sundays by User:Leozanoni and declined it, although it was a difficult decision. I thought that an article about the poem is appropriate. However, the draft is written like a class paper on the poem and makes a lot of references to the words of the poem (and the skillful use of words is what the art of poetry is about). It appears that the poem was previously included in the draft, and has been redacted as copyright violation. Leozanoni has asked me on my talk page for further advice, and I am asking her for the comments of other experienced editors. Leozanoni also writes:

I'd like to ask you also if you could point me in the right direction in order to get the proper permission to publish the entire poem on the draft page. I already sent an Email to Liveright (the ones that have the copyright) and replied me they have no objection as long as we cite them.(I posted the conversation on the talk page of the draft and still a user deleted the poem). My thought is that the permission is inadequate, since Wikipedia requires that all text, including quoted material, is released under the Wikipedia copyleft not only for publication on our web site but for republication with proper attribution anywhere by all in the world. It is unlikely that a publisher, or the heirs of a poet, will grant the permission that we require. Is my understanding correct? I think that many editors do not understand what Wikipedia requires and so why it is not easily worked around.

Comments?

Robert McClenon (talk) 07:49, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

The relevant policies are contained within our notability guidelines. In the case of a poem by an author the gold standard for establishing notability would be articles and books which discuss the poem and its themes independent from the author. A perfect example of this would be the Aeneid. There are hundreds if not thousands of books which deal specifically with this work written in every language. Secondary to this would be chapters in books about the author which identify the poem as an important work. If the article passes these criteria, there are templates you can use to notify the editor that the article text is overly detailed or includes trivial information. These templates are listed at this suppliment to our policies on trivia and excessive detail. You can tag the article. Suggest removal of copy vio information as well as information based on sources which aren’t specifically dealing with the poem or its relevance. Focus should be on the history of the poem, its significance in the author’s body of work and its sphere of influence on other poets and society. The contents of the poem and their meaning deserve a mention, but should be balanced per our policy on due weight - I think its fine for you to make these suggestions and ask the editor to resubmit it after the changes have been made. At the moment you are right that it looks like an academic paper and puts undue focus on the meaning of the poem. Edaham (talk) 08:09, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Several of the references have the entire poem (Landau, others). Can the editor of the draft mention those without violating Wikipedia's copyright rules? At first I had expected that the references would be about the poet rather than the poem, but some of them are extensive analysis of the poem itself. I do agree that the draft as written is too long and incorporates the editor's original research in addition to what can be gleaned from published sources. I recommend try again - but a lot shorter. David notMD (talk) 11:13, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Leozanoni (talk) 13:29, 7 December 2018 (UTC)