Talk:Ina Coolbrith/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: María (habla conmigo) 19:42, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'll be reviewing this article for GAC. At first glance it's fairly good, certainly interesting, but I feel it needs some tweaking in order to better fulfill the criteria. Many of my suggestions have to do with minor issues, but I do see one major issue as far as coverage goes; see details below. I'll allow some time for my suggestions and comments to be considered before I pass it. Very good work so far, though. :)

Lead

Overall, the lead is too short and is missing key information from the article to truly act as a summary per WP:LEAD. Her early and personal life, for example, as well as her career as a librarian, can be briefly mentioned here.
a prominent and beloved figure in the San Francisco Bay Area literary community -- We have to be careful with WP:NPOV here; I would say she should be noted as either "prominent" or "beloved" here, but not both; otherwise, it may require a citation.
The second paragraph seems redundant as it is now. I'm sure this may change once the lead is expanded somewhat per my first comment, but the last sentence ("Coolbrith broke new ground for women poets") is basically a summary of the entire paragraph.

Early life

Coolbrith's mother was then married to Joseph Smith, Jr., in 1842. Following Smith's death at the hands of an anti-polygamist mob... -- No luck in love, eh? Just out of curiosity, how many wives did Smith have at this point? I know that many readers will recognize him as a Polygamist and conclude before the second sentence that Coolbrith's mother was one of many, it still kind of took me by surprise. Could this be expanded upon slightly, for clarity's sake?

Poet and librarian

This section is huge. Could it perhaps be cut into several sections, or split with subsections? Huge walls of uninterrupted text are daunting; an obvious divide would be between her work as a poet and that of a librarian.
She became friends with Adah Menken.[2] She also worked as a schoolteacher for extra income. -- These sentences could be finessed somewhat.
Coolbrith's nephew Henry Frank Peterson came to work with her at the library, and began to organize the books into a classification scheme suitable for unguided browsing by subject, title and author. Coolbrith resisted; she did not want to lose the reading-room feeling that she had established. -- I'm a librarian, so my mind automatically went to "which classification system?!" This info ties directly with her nephew successfully taking over the library later on, and seems tangential separated from it; can it be combined satisfactorily?
As well, the collection included "The Sea-Shell" and "Sailed", two poems in which Coolbrith described love for women with deep sympathy and an unusually vivid physical imagery. -- Beginning a sentence with "as well" is awkward, but other than that, the nod to (what I'm guessing is) lesbian-themed poetry comes out of nowhere. Is this along the lines of Emily Dickinson's poetry, where modern critics have read homoerotic meaning into the works?

Earthquake and fire

Coolbrith never resumed the work of writing the history.[5] There were rumors that she had accepted men such as Harte, Stoddard, Clemens and Miller as occasional lovers.[32] She said, "Were I to write what I know, the book would be too sensational to print, but were I to write what I think proper, it would be too dull to read." -- One of these things is not like the others! In short, rumors as to her sex life don't exactly fit here. The cquote is also depreciated.

Recognition

Much of this section seems to be about Coolbrith's later life, rather than any literary or professional legacy, which is what I expect when I see a section titled "Recognition". I can see both themes (later life recognition and overall legacy) being expanded on, perhaps in separate sections.

My main issue with this article is the fact that, despite what the lead states Coolbrith broke new ground in women's poetry, much of it is glossed over. How did she, exactly? I would also appreciate some examples of her work given in-text, or perhaps even in quoteboxes, to allow the reader to get a taste of the "wide variety of themes in her work" (quote from lead). Her "sensuous descriptions of natural scenes" which "foreshadowed the Imagist school and the work of Robert Frost" aren't described anywhere else but the lead, and I'm not even certain what pieces are considered her best, or most recognizable, works. I have more of a sense of her friends and her career as a librarian than I do of her career as a poet, and that's what she's billed as first! Just a little more attention paid to her work would help greatly.

References and external links

This is very minor, but I see that many of the citations that include URLs are missing access dates, while some of them aren't. Otherwise, formatting seems consistent.
The EL section is overkill. Rather than linking to 20+ (!) individual poems, which cheapens them all, how about linking to the volumes only via GoogleBooks? I also see no reason to separate the single link under "Research resources", since that's the sort of thing that should be included with the external links.

Okay, this may seem like a lot, but I hope you agree that most of it is quite minor. If nothing else, my main suggestions are: 1). expansion of the lead and 2). additions regarding Coolbrith's literary legacy. Some expansion here and there, maybe a few snippet quotes from her poems, and the article will improve greatly. I'll put this article on hold for now so that changes can be mulled over, so let me know if you have any questions or need additional time. Best of luck, María (habla conmigo) 19:42, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for initiating the review! Every one of you points is valid, and I will address them all after working on a couple of other articles. Binksternet (talk) 20:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the changes that have been implemented so far:

Expanded upon polygamist Joseph Smith, Jr.
Extensive "External links" list of poems reduced greatly to include only the most notable ones discussed in the article. The smaller list is then reintroduced as "Selected poems".
References formatted to have a more uniform appearance, with access date parameter where appropriate. Binksternet (talk) 00:45, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More changes: the lead section has been expanded to include the breadth of the article.
Too-huge "Poet and librarian" section split into "Poet" and "Librarian".
Deprecated cquotes turned into blockquotes or box quotes.
Reading flow augmented in disjointed "occasional lovers" paragraph. More to come. Binksternet (talk) 05:12, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is work still being done? I see it has not been edited in a week, so is it ready for another read-through? María (habla conmigo) 20:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Almost! I have yet to address the content of Coolbrith's poetry, and I am sitting on a stack of references that will help me build the text. Binksternet (talk) 20:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have placed throughout the article observations of what kind of poetry style was shown by Coolbrith, to balance the bit in the lead section, instead of adding a separate Literary Legacy section. I have added a few short poems in quoteboxes. I think we are ready to resume the review. Thank you so much for your patience! Binksternet (talk) 18:58, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Final review

I'm so impressed with this article's progress! The new information regarding Coolbrith's poetic works, as well as the lovely quoteboxes and photos, have greatly added to my understanding of this interesting woman. I know feel it fulfills the GA criteria as follows:

1. Well-written: Yes; small changes have been made.
2. Factually accurate and verifiable: Yes.
3. Broad in its coverage: Yes.
4. Neutral: Yes.
5. Stable: Yes.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images: Yes.

Congrats! On a related note, if you are considering FAC as the next step for this article, I would suggest revisiting my previous suggestion re: a separate section solely devoted to Coolbrith's poetry; while the current set-up is fine (great, even!) for GA, there are those literary-minded regulars at FAC who may see the lack of such a section a major drawback in the comprehensiveness of an article dedicated to an important literary figure. While much of the information is present, they may argue that such a section would help readers pin down exactly what they're looking for, so they don't have to dig through the entire article. If you need help in this regard sometime down the line, I'd be happy to help; I have experience in gnashing my teeth through writing such sections. :) Congrats once more, and great job! María (habla conmigo) 14:45, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic! I certainly do wish to take this to FA, but I must let it percolate while I work on a few other pressing things. At that future time, I will take your advice to form a separate section discussing literary reaction and critical review. Thank you for your dedication on this project! Binksternet (talk) 16:19, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. :) María (habla conmigo) 16:35, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]