This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hampshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hampshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kent, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the county of Kent in South East England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Semi-protected edit request on 27 December 2013
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Charles Dickens' middle name was Terance. Please add this to the title and any other relevant parts of the article. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
Not done: Thanks, but we need a reliable source before this can be added. I found no hits for "Charles Terance Dickens" or "Charles Terrance Dickens" using Google or Google Books. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 00:37, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 28 December 2013
The section on Dickens' second visit to the United States is badly written (containing confusing statements and unclear references to facts that have not been explained):
1. Dickens spent the month shuttling between Boston and New York, where alone he gave 22 readings at Steinway Hall for this period. Does this mean that he was alone on stage in Steinway Hall, but had others on stage with him at other sites? I'm assuming the "alone" was intended to mean that of the 76 readings, 22 of them were in Steinway, but that is not what it says. Additionally, "for this period" doesn't really fit. May I suggest changing this to "...Boston and New York; at Manhattan's Steinway Hall alone, he gave 22 readings."
2. Although he had started to suffer from what he called the "true American catarrh", he kept to a schedule that would have challenged a much younger man, even managing to squeeze in some sleighing in Central Park. "Catarrh" is such an unusual word that I request a change consisting of a link to the Wikipedia page for this medical condition. Additionally, the phrase "true American catarrh" is from the 18 April 1868 speech Dickens gave at Delmonico's -- should that not have been footnoted?
3. During his travels, he saw a significant change in the people and the circumstances of America. -- In the original speech from which this is taken, the context explains that the change is one that took place over 25 years (when Dickens visited the U.S. for the first time). Without that context, the sentence implies that the "change" took place over the few months between November 1867-April 1868. I request an edit which adds that context: Change to During his travels, he saw a significant change in the people and the circumstances of America since his earlier visit in 1842.
4. His final appearance was at a banquet the American Press held in his honour at Delmonico's on 18 April, when he promised never to denounce America again. Although an earlier paragraph mentioned difficulties that Dickens was having with American publishers not honoring his copyright, there's nothing in the article that says Dickens ever denounced America itself. More detail is needed; otherwise, that sentence should be taken out as meaningless flattery to his audience.
5. By the end of the tour, the author could hardly manage solid food, subsisting on champagne and eggs beaten in sherry. This sentence belongs in the previous paragraph, about Dickens' schedule and the stress it placed on his health. It has nothing to do with the current paragraph. Please edit to have this sentence at the end of that paragraph as follows: "...sleighing in Central Park. But by the end of the tour, the author could hardly manage solid food, subsisting on champagne and eggs beaten in sherry." 184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:45, 28 December 2013 (UTC) Tascal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 18:09, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2014
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Typo: "connected series or sketches". "Of", surely.
Removed excessive examples from the introduction
The introduction mentions how Dickens would sometimes change plot or character elements in an ongoing serial, in response to feedback. This isn't vital for the intro, but seems ok to me. Then an example, Miss Mowcher, is given. An example may not be needed in the compressed space of the introduction, but it seems like a pretty good example.
Then there are four examples of characters inspired by real people, only one of which relates to the given theme of modification. This is becoming a list, and clearly too much detail for the intro. You could force it to make a little more sense, by introducing a second point, about how some characters were drawn from life. But that's unremarkable; it's common practice for a novelist, and doesn't seem to me to be needed in the introduction.
So I'm cutting this prose list, after the single example of Miss Mowcher. Someone put some work into sourcing these, so I'll leave the cut material here, in case anyone wants to work it in smoothly, later in the article.
Fagin in Oliver Twist apparently mirrors the famous fence Ikey Solomon; His caricature of Leigh Hunt in the figure of Mr Skimpole in Bleak House was likewise toned down on advice from some of his friends, as they read episodes. In the same novel, both Lawrence Boythorne and Mooney the beadle are drawn from real life—Boythorne from Walter Savage Landor and Mooney from 'Looney', a beadle at Salisbury Square.
I don't think the templates for the individual works should be on the author's page; Dickens's own template covers his works. IMO, the templates for each individual work should be on the work's page and also the various works mentioned in each template. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:24, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Remove. This article is about the author, not his works, and allowing templates on individual works can lead to an accretion of information best left to the articles on those notable works. The Marshalsea template should also be removed. It is too far afield, and no one will come to this article to look for links to information on that prison. Kablammo (talk) 12:59, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
I have removed Marshalsea. If we are to add templates for every setting or subject of Dicken's works we might as well add templates for London, Paris, the French Revolution, Christmas, and so on. Kablammo (talk) 14:16, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
I removed the templates based on this discussion. Tony has now reverted that change, and comments on my talk page:
Per discussion last summer on the talk page. As you know there, was a more general discussion elsewhere on the question which I believe resulted in no consensus, effectively leaving the issue to an article-by-article basis. I don't know where that discussion is now. Kablammo (talk) 22:25, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Tony, thank you for coming here to discuss, but I think the discussion for this article belongs on the articles 's talk page (where I will now move it, and respond further there). Kablammo (talk) 13:35, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
As the prior general discussion arrived at no resolution, and the opinions were 2-1 in favor of removal, as Tony noted (Ssilvers and me in favor of removal, and TonyTheTiger opposed to removal and in favor of the additional templates) I removed the templates last year. Tony has now reverted that change. I will reinstate the change (and remove the templates) soon, unless further discussion here or elsewhere arrives at a result different to that of last summer. Kablammo (talk) 14:07, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Merged from section above after this section was created
Tony, there is nothing in the larger discussion that resolves anything, and the possible compromise suggested by the closer was not enacted. Following local consensus here is not prohibited by anything in that discussion. The proper course is what I did: honor the consensus here of this page. Kablammo (talk) 15:04, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
(ec)When User talk:I JethroBT closed the 29-person discussion at WP:NOVELS that spanned from May 2 to July 5, 2013, it indicated that this had resulted in no decision for the extensive list of authors with multiple templates at issue. He made no mention of the proper thing to do being to hold discussions on the 35 talk pages for the 35 authors specifically named or any others also affected by the decision. The 3-person discussion at Talk:Charles Dickens were merely two people responding to an 21 October 2012 separately. SSilvers responded here at 14:24, 10 May 2013 (UTC). By that time 11 people had already weighed in at WP:NOVELS. It was a form of WP:FORUMSHOPping. Then, in the face of an impending no consensus, Kablammo responded to the FORUMSHOPping on 27 June 2013. There is no reason to recognize a three-person FORUMSHOP over a 29-person decision. Do not remove the templates without a valid supporting discussion somewhere. The appropriate venues, IMO are WP:LIT and WP:NOVELS where a policy can be set for all 35 authors in a discussion that has some substance. I don't want to hold this discussion 35 times.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:18, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Tony, please do not make accusations of forum shopping, particularly where the editors were simply responding to a thread you started here long before the larger discussion elsewhere. And it is not up to you do decide what is valid and what is not-- the consensus here is clear. Seek to change it if you want, but please stop overriding it to suit your preferences. Kablammo (talk) 15:25, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Why are you talking as if I am the one overriding consensus? I tell you what. Since the close of the general discussion hinted that in cases with more than 5 of these templates a separate rule might be in order, I would agree to a compromise like the one at Jane Austen where the multiple templates are capped. Are you willing to compromise?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:47, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Tony, on this page there is consensus to remove them. Kablammo (talk) 08:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Obviously, if half the people want to remove them and half the people want them kept, if you wait long enough there will be three people who want to remove them. If you call for opinions you are more likely to find a lot of support for them.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Hopefully pinging these people will generate a broader set of opinions on whether including these templates is useful on the Charles Dickens page.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)