Thanks again for all the high quality contributions
User:Ottava Rima has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Ottava Rima's day!
You have made remarkable contributions to the project,
and the editors and readers of those pages are and always will be grateful to you for them. We all look forward to seeing you return and continue in such development. Thank you again for your outstanding efforts at article development.
Thanks from me to and thanks for trying to save the Han / Roman article as your last action. If you decide to return I look forward to seeing more of your gorgeous content for me to review over at Good Articles. Merry Christmas! FeydHuxtable (talk) 13:51, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merry Christmas, Ottava Rima!
Peace be with you, brother.
Serious. Peace. Let these things go and be filled with joy. Christ was not gifted to humanity for you to be unhappy.
Someday at Christmas man will not fail
Take hope because your love will prevail
Someday a new world that we can start
With hope in every heart [1]
And to you to, Moni. But don't worry, I could never be unhappy in regards to Christ. :) I'm sure most people have read excerpts of my column to know that so far. ;/ Have a good New Year, too. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:48, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On July 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kubla Khan, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On July 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kubla Khan, which you created or substantially expanded somewhere else. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and somebody else may add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting missing or substandard article, then please write about it elsewhere and perhaps somebody will import it and suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi, Ottava. I just wanted to thank you for having this brought to my attention. You might be interested in what we're doing with your tip; we've launched a special "CCI" (special, since this isn't a contributor) and are planning to appeal to the relevant WikiProject for assistance. It's going to be a lot of work cleaning it all up, but certainly it is much needed, and the longer problems like this go unaddressed, the more tangled clean-up becomes. --Moonriddengirl(talk)17:23, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I just stumbled across your story while looking up other things.
Suffice to say, it's a whale of a tale. Being rather brutally honest, you were kind of like me back in 2007;
Good intentions, but poor execution.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to insult you or be mean or cowardly. Seriously, you made some INCREDIBLE edits (a quick once-over of your edit history will back me up here), but looking over your block log tells me that you were always rather confromational (a Wikiversity fracas with the equally-legendary Abd springs to mind), and as such, you were always "riding the ragged edge of disaster", to quote Jim Davis. And you got tangled up with the ArbCom...there's a pit that's hard to get out of. Banned, even stripped of the ability to edit your own talkpage and reply to me. That's a rather stiff punishment, no? You must have really screwed up somewhere (I'm not going to dwell on that). Still, in my eyes, you deserve a...what is it now, twentieth chance? (just kidding). But there are a bunch of people who are behind you all the way. I'm not one of them....I know bog all about you, really. Have a listen to Queen's Hang On In There and mull it over; try to see how it relates to your experiences.
Xterra120:02, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Covent-Garden Journal was an English literary periodical published twice a week for most of 1752. It was edited and almost entirely financed by novelist, playwright, and essayist Henry Fielding(pictured), under a pseudonym. The Journal incited the "Paper War" of 1752–1753, a conflict between a number of contemporary literary critics and writers, which began after Fielding declared war on the "armies of Grub Street" in the first issue. His proclamation attracted multiple aggressors and instigated a long-lasting debate argued in the pages of their respective publications. Initially waged for the sake of increasing sales, the Paper War ultimately became much larger than Fielding had expected. Further controversy erupted in June, when Fielding expressed support for a letter decrying the Government's 1752 Disorderly House Act in the Journal. His remarks were viewed by the public as an endorsement of the legality of prostitution. The final issue of the Journal was released on 25 November 1752. In its last months, poor sales had resulted in a transition from biweekly to weekly release. Ill-health and a disinclination to continue led Fielding to end its run after the 72nd number. (Full article...)
Today, I like your TFA, "... a lot of examination and discussion over just about every line over months and months. I will welcome -all- concerns and comments, and I will thoroughly discuss matters with Haiduc in order to ensure that changes would not disrupt the balance. I would also prefer to keep the balance over anything else. However, I do feel that the page is extremely thorough and well put together, as it represents just about -everything- on Giraud. So, I now present to you our dear Nicolo Giraud, the boy/young man who almost absolutely nothing is really known, for your consideration." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:48, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome back. I'll be really happy to see you contributing as prolifically as you did in the past. If there's anything I can do to make that easier for you, please say so here. I'll keep your talk page on my watchlist. All the best --RexxS (talk) 23:06, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In 1982, Wilson was born in Griffin, Georgia.[1] He grew up in Macon, Georgia and graduated from Tattnall Square Academy in 2000.[2]
He has a B.A. (English) from the University of Georgia, an M.F.A. (Poetry) from The Johns Hopkins University, and an M. F. A. (Poetry) [3] from Boston University in 2008.[1] Currently he is a doctoral candidate at The Catholic University of America, and he serves as the Office Manager of the Association of Literary Scholars, Critics, and Writers and editor of Literary Matters, the association's digital literary journal.[2] He lives in Baltimore with his wife.[1]
Publications
His works have been published in 32 Poems,[1]Able Muse,[1]The Classical Outlook,[4]Dappled Things,[1]First Things,[1]Light,[1]The Hopkins Review,[1]Iron Horse Literary Review,[1]Measure,[1]Raintown Review,[1]River Styx,[1]The Sewanee Review,[1]The Sewanee Theological Review,[1]Unsplendid,[1] among others.
His first collection of poetry, The Stranger World was published by Measure Press in June 2017.[1]Mark Jarman said, "The Stranger World includes heartbreaking lyrics, haunting narratives, inspired translations, and finely honed satires... written with the authority of mastery."[2]Robert Pinsky wrote, "Ryan Wilson’s mastery of traditional forms serves a fresh, distinctive poetry of candor and meditation: soulful rather than brittle, more observant than performative. The idiomatic, American blank verse of Wilson’s 'Authority' and 'L’Estraneo' is as fluent as that of Robert Frost, but with an oblique tenderness that reminds me of Frost’s friend Edward Thomas."[2]
I updated the article proposed above for anyone to use it. As a disclosure, I know the gentleman (he is a bit of a big to do in the literary circles). I also have a lot of notes for Lamia and am looking for someone who would be interested in working with me. Drop me a note. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:55, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... I can just reformat your references and/or move the content to either page for you, but that's it. Thanks. --George Ho (talk) 02:36, 20 July 2017 (UTC); okey dokey, 03:05, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Ottava--the praise cited in note 2, are those blurbs from the book? They all sound good, but I typically don't regard those very highly. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 12:03, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I know--I'm a big fan. I have his Sounds of Poetry laying around somewhere. But the sourcing here is tricky. Where did Pinsky say this? His publications are sourced to the BU website, and these blurbs are sourced to the journal that he himself edits. So what's left, I suppose, is the awards--one of which may be notable, but even that one, the Donald Justice prize, hasn't received much coverage (I mean both your subject winning it and the award itself). In fact, I don't see a single real secondary publication in here, so I won't be the one moving it to main space. If RexxS wishes to do so, that's his prerogative of course. Drmies (talk) 13:34, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Awards are secondary to the author but primary to themselves. The problem with modern poets in general is that they tend to have very few news articles so award pages tend to be all we have left. Also [10] has some background on the publication and Donald Justice Poetry Prize - "The award includes publication of his manuscript, The Stranger World". This suggested to me that the Pinksy quotes were connected to this. I'm still looking for some more sources. Ottava Rima (talk) 13:47, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Awards themselves need secondary sourcing to prove they're notable awards. That Justice award is hard to gauge; it's not a big national one, of course. So it helps, sure, but whether that alone is enough is a matter of judgment. I am well aware of the problems with poetic sourcing (you know I've worked on a few articles pertaining to modern poetry...) and it's something that I'm working on; what we really need is a set of guidelines (we need to get away from "poet X published in these journals" and then list them all) and a list of notable publications and awards. Most of all, we need a list of publications and zines whose reviews are reliable and important. I know someone who writes on LitHub, and the moment he started doing that his career started happening--so clearly that's an important place in the world of poetry. Just like poetry.com, haha. If only poetry generated the kind of airtime that's dedicated to monster trucks, K-pop, rassling, and all that. Drmies (talk) 13:55, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, the Frost Farm Poetry Prize should probably have its own page, seeing as how it is from the Robert Frost foundation. This is interesting, though. Poor Robert Frost and his legacy. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:01, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My hesitation in putting the article in mainspace to begin with, is that I'm no expert on the significance of the awards. If this were some here-today-and-gone-tomorrow pop star, they'd have hundreds of mentions in the popular press for every two-bit award they received. Sadly, no such channels exist for promulgating the news of more traditional artists' awards. However, my take is that the sections devoted to Wilson in particular by John Hopkins Press, and by Boston University amount to "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" – the touchstone of our notability criteria. I would also argue that "The person's work ... has won significant critical attention" which is the notability guideline for creative writers. No doubt others may disagree, so I'll leave the final decision to publish the article in mainspace to someone else for now. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 16:23, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's interesting that Ryan Wilson (poet) has just made its way into mainspace. You were right, Drmies: predictably, the quotes have attracted disagreement about their sourcing, and it would perhaps be best to reduce them to a summary as a compromise. We'll see how that pans out. --RexxS (talk) 17:18, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm a good occasion to do some updating: the LitHub person mentioned above is getting two books out with Riverhead Books. Anyway, Rexx, what I mentioned above, those are also the standards I try to live by--I don't write in awards unless I can verify them, even if I know them to be true. And my standards--obviously notable ones (even if "obviously notable" to the experts only) can do with some kind of primary sourcing, from the organization, less obviously notable ones require secondary sourcing of the not-just-local-news kind. Drmies (talk) 17:34, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes, the Pinsky quote...can't find anything for that. I assume it's a note of sorts pertaining to an award, or possibly a blurb for a book. I don't like it, sorry. Drmies (talk) 17:37, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Pinsky quote can be found on the bio page at the Association of Literary Scholars, Critics, and Writer's journal Literary Matters: [14]. The same quote is also at Verse Daily [15] and poems.com [16]. Also, CUA has a faculty page that is available [17]. Dappled Things has an interview [18]. Also, Archive.Org has a file on him as part of their "Apostrophe Cast" program [19]. And here is a review [20]. And in searching, I found him at Yale Review to add to the others [21]. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:25, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Ottava. I've transcribed them onto Talk:Ryan Wilson (poet) and asked if others would like to use them to expand the article (hint Drmies). Otherwise I'll try to find time to incorporate them myself to the best of my limited ability. --RexxS (talk) 21:50, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ottava, that they're repeated on various websites doesn't tell me anything about when the man said that and to whom and in what context... Drmies (talk) 21:57, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My spidey-sense is telling me that the quotes smack of something you would read on the dust-cover of a book like The Stranger World. Unfortunately, the nearest library copy to me appears to be in San Angelo, TX (7800 km away).
Update: My spidey-sense didn't let me down. Have a look at https://www.amazon.com/Stranger-World-Ryan-Wilson/dp/193957420X – there's a link on the left under the front cover image, [See all 2 images]. Clicking that allows you to see the back cover. Lo and behold! There are the quotes from Pinsky, Yezzi, Warren and Jarman. So the answers to the good Doctor's questions are: the quotes were said to the publisher's gopher who was canvassing for text for the back cover prior to the book's publication. Does that help? --RexxS (talk) 23:15, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The publisher is the group that awarded the Donald Justice Prize (Measure Press), and publication of the book is part of the prize. As for the Pinsky quote, he is a former laureate and has a relationship with Measure Press, often reviewing works. He also has a relationship with Ryan as per the interview ("Anyway, a few dozen drafts, a lot of help from Robert Pinsky, and a year later, “The City Under Vesuvius” came out in heroic couplets") and taught in the Boston University program where Ryan graduated. It would be a notable quote simply because he is a very notable individual. Bias doesn't really affect quotations, especially when most quotations are formed by bias. Would it settle any concerns if it was from Robert Pinsky's website? Ottava Rima (talk) 23:29, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Ottava Rima. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Ottava Rima. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
None, in particular; any, or all of them, I suppose. Really, I'm just curious what the procedure is for contributing while banned. Benjamin (talk) 15:17, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
@Salavat: "Orphaned file with no obvious value in transferring to Commons" is not a reason to delete. Editors may choose to upload to Wikipedia freely-licensed images for use in an article at a future date without any need to transfer to Commons, and there is no deadline to include the image in an article. I've declined the prod. See File talk:Drapiers Letter 2.JPG. --RexxS (talk) 04:07, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I just started making my way through the articles on T. S. Eliot you wrote. Thanks again for your dedication to qualitiy work. Viriditas (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for uploading File:Streatham Park.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
