Talk:Elizabeth Gaskell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Word usage[edit]

The letter I quote re dialect appears to be misquoted in the Penguin Classics introduction. I have used the version from the collected letters. Espresso Addict 12:09, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Publications[edit]

I've tidied the publications list, which appeared to include a number of inaccuracies, according to Jenny Uglow's biography. Espresso Addict 12:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

I've assessed this article for the biography project, and included some points for improvement, which I hope will be of assistance in improving the article. Espresso Addict 05:48, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mrs Gaskell's Wedgewood relations[edit]

I live near Knutsford, and two of the town's famous former residents are Mrs Gaskell and Sir Henry Holland. I knew Sir Henry Holland was a grandnephew of Josiah Wedgewood (blue plaque outside his birthplace, now a restaurant called Piccolino on King Street in Knutsford) and this page says Mrs Gaskell's mother was a Holland, presumably the same family because related to the Wedgewoods and the Darwins. However, according to http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/3203/Gaskell2.html Mrs Gaskell's mother's maiden name was Willets, not Holland; she was the daughter of Catherine Wedgwood (sister of Josiah) and sister of Mary Willets, who was the mother of Sir Henry Holland. So Mrs Gaskell and Sir Henry Holland were first cousins but Mrs Gaskell was not a blood relative of the Hollands. Can anyone comment on this? (The family tree in question also gives Henry Holland's father's name as Samuel while other sources agree on Peter) SpikeMolec 14:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:EGaskell.jpg[edit]

Image:EGaskell.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting off Plymouth Grove[edit]

The inclusion of the material on Plymouth Grove (including all the related categories & external links) has led to a rather odd feel to this article. I'd suggest splitting off the material purely relating to the building into a separate article; as the building is grade II* listed there should be no problem with the notability of the sub-article. This article would retain the associations of the Gaskell family with the house, but not the architectural details nor its subsequent history and current state. Any objections? Espresso Addict 22:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As no-one objected I've split off this material to 84 Plymouth Grove, Manchester. Espresso Addict 09:36, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

proposed new external link[edit]

I'd like to add a link like:

to the External Links section. This links to Elizabeth Gaskell works that you can download to read on a cell phone. I have read quite a few from this site and got a lot of value out being able to read the PD texts away from the PC.

The texts are Public Domain in the US, just like Project Gutenberg, they are packaged with the reader and available under a creative commons licence (share if (attribution, non-commercial, no derivative) ). The site is non-commercial without registration, subscription, or advertising. The texts as packaged together with the reader as a java program that runs on cell phones, this is a way for people to access the authors work that adds to the range in the existing external links (hopefully translating to more reading going on).

I checked WP:EL and the link seems appropriate:

  • What should be linked: '...should link to a site hosting a copy of the work if none of the "Links normally to be avoided" criteria apply.'
  • Links normally to be avoided: it seems only #8 might apply; 'Direct links to documents that require external applications (such as Flash or Java) to view the relevant content...'. The site lets you download java programs that only run on a J2ME environment, this means most/all current cell phones. So although they are limited to being read on a phone they do add an access method to all the others in the existing External Links, in the same way that LibriVox adds a format but requires an mp3 player.

Filomath 09:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'd personally prefer not to add the link unless it provides content not available elsewhere, as it does require an external application and is also designed for specific hardware. However, this question has a much wider applicability than just Elizabeth Gaskell, so perhaps the place to enquire whether this sort of link is generally acceptable would be the Novels WikiProject? If they were in favour of adding such links, I wouldn't object. Espresso Addict 12:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • My intention is to let people know they can read Gaskell and PD works without being tied to the PC. You can read these books on very basic/generic phones (even my 5 year old cdma phone) so in that sense it expands possibility where requiring some particular PC software or 'book reader hardware' restricts possibility. Thanks for the input, I'll check out the Novels WikiProject. Filomath 08:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Project Gutenberg, I believe, offers everything in plaintext, so it doesn't tie one to a particular software or hardware, and should be accessible by everyone who can read Wikipedia. It has the big advantages of being stable, extensive, ad free and proofread, and its license is less restrictive than BooksInMyPhone. Espresso Addict 14:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nicholas Gaskell[edit]

The box speaks of a son named Nicholas, but he isn't mentioned anywhere else on the page. The name was originally formatted incorrectly - {[Nicholas Gaskell}] - but I corrected it before realizing that he wasn't mentioned anywhere else. It appears that the name was added by an editor with no other edits. Cloudlet (talk) 02:39, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Elizabeth Gaskell/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Rated C class:

Positive:

  • 5 images
  • bibliography
  • Section on use of dialect is relevant and referenced, but is currently far more detailed than the rest of the literary style and themes section
  • references included
  • Some useful external links

Negative:

  • Referencing is incomplete
  • Information on life is relatively limited, especially compared with the volume of published information
  • Little information on works (eg themes, genres, critical reception &c), and what is there is currently rather muddled and poorly divided between sections
  • The external links could do with a strong prune

Last edited at 04:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 14:21, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elizabeth Gaskell. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 19:39, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elizabeth Gaskell. 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:

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) 14:52, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Elizabeth Gaskell. 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:

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) 18:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

suspect edits[edit]

The edits done by 84.92.187.23 in 2016-12-10 look a bit peculiar to me. Are they correct? As an example, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Gaskell&diff=next&oldid=754048696 seems weird and unsourced. DHR (talk) 05:43, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DHR: I agree that the edit you link is odd; according to Uglow the house was The Heath and Sandlebridge was the house of Samuel & Anne Holland. The rest just seems peculiar. Espresso Addict (talk) 19:06, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Salacious Charlotte Brontë[edit]

On Gaskell's biography of Charlotte Brontë, it says 'the rest she omitted, deciding certain, more salacious aspects were better kept hidden'. What were these omitted aspects? They should be linked to, either in Charlotte's article or externally.

Ralph Corderoy (talk) 11:53, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elizabeth_Gaskell&oldid=1194924838"