Talk:Philip Larkin

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Philip Larkin article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Philip Larkin has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 6, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
November 20, 2009	Peer review	Reviewed

Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 9, 2018, December 2, 2018, and August 9, 2023.

Current status: Good article

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as High-importance).

Coventry (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Coventry, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CoventryWikipedia:WikiProject CoventryTemplate:WikiProject CoventryCoventry articles

Yorkshire High‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Philip Larkin is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Poetry High‑importance

	Poetry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry 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.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Libraries Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries 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.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Jazz Low‑importance

	Jazz portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jazz, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of jazz 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.JazzWikipedia:WikiProject JazzTemplate:WikiProject JazzJazz articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was reviewed by The Independent on February 12, 2006. (Link to review)
Comments: "A good and fair account."
For more information about external reviews of Wikipedia articles and about this review in particular, see this page.

Issues still outstanding from Peer Review[edit]

Although we were able to put done tags on a lot of the issues from the Peer Review the following are still outstanding: almost-instinct 13:39, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BB says: "It seems that too little use is made in the article of the collected letters, which could be used to flesh out more details of his private life, including some quite significant incidents. Among things not mentioned in the article are his being made a Companion of Honour in summer 1985 (letter to Anthony Powell 7 August 1985) and his being too ill to receive it from the Queen (letter 18 October 1985 to Colin Gunner). Also, we learn that Larkin was made a Companion of Literature (C.Litt) by the RSL, a more singular honour than a Fellowship (letter to Robert Conquest, 4 July 1978), and we can read what he thought about this ("Down among the dead men")" Does anyone have with access to this book? If so, could they dredge up the information being pointed to by BB?
- I own the Letters, so could do this. Macphysto (talk) 14:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2.1 Juvenilia &c.

BB says: "Booth's collection of the Coleman fiction and other early writing has a lengthy introduction discussing these works. It would be good to see this used as a source. In particular there is discussion of two unfinished novels No For An Answer and A New World Symphony, dated as between 1948 and 1954. These are not mentioned in the article, and I believe they should be, particularly as Booth's book has long (80+ pages) extracts from both." I don't have this book. Does anyone else?

"In what way did [The North Ship] show the influence of Yeats?"

2.2 Mature works

"I feel like the analysis of Larkin's writing is a bit thin. The "Creative output" section doesn't contain any analysis of his novels, for example."

2.3 Poetic style

M3 says: "I'm not getting a sense in the Creative output section of how Larkin's poetry style or themes resounded with his generation, whether he was revolutionary or not, whether he was as plain as any poet who gets into a magazine" and "I am also wishing for a statement or paragraph in this section ... that roundly states what his poems were about, what essence they captured, and how critics have since described his career"

"Larkin's earliest work showed the influence of Eliot, Auden and Yeats, and the development of his mature poetic identity in the early 1950s coincided with the growing influence on him of Thomas Hardy. - In what specific ways did these other poets influence Larkin's work?"

"The "Poetic style" section is almost entirley made up of quotations. Could some of these be removed and paraphrases used instead? It is jarring for the reader to read so many quotes."

2.4 Prose non-fiction

BB says: "we should be told whose view it is that in Required Writing his scepticism is at its most "nuanced and illuminating" (and preferably what this means), and at its most inflamed and polemical in the Daily Telegraph reviews. The sentence beginning "His scepticism...." is much too long and needs dividing" This, IIRC was written a long time ago. It would be good if someone could rewrite the whole section, IMO

More wanted on Larkin at Sixty
- I'll see what I can do (but not until after I've supplied alt text for another 10 images in Leeds). --GuillaumeTell 16:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you :-) (and I think a leisurely pace has been proved to be de rigeur round here) almost-instinct 16:31, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The "Critical opinion" section is almost a list of opinions rather than a coherent, topically-based section. There is even a one-sentence paragraph. This section needs to be restructed so that the reader is led through the different ideas rather than through the different critics. The names of the critics are not so important as the ideas. Also, the critics should be grouped together better, to indicate broad trends in Larkin scholarship. The paragraph that begins "The view that Larkin is not a nihilist or pessimist, but actually displays optimism in his works, is certainly not universally endorsed, but Chatterjee's lengthy study suggests the degree to which old stereotypes of Larkin are now being transcended" is the best example of the kind of topical coherence that the rest of the section should have."

Dead links[edit]

Just to note there are few broken URLs in the article's references, perhaps jeopardizing its good article status (but the only thing preventing it from becoming an FA in my view). Sir Richardson (talk) 15:04, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this. I've been through them all, and think these are all the dead ones: notes ~~45, 123~~, 132, 133, ~~139~~, ~~158, 159, 162~~. I'll work through them and find replacements asap. As for FA I would imagine the FAC reviewers would point to those issues still outstanding from the Peer Review. IMO it wouldn't take much work by someone equipped to deal with the issues. Yours, almost-instinct 15:27, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two left to go. Am thinking that more up to date info is needed, not just a replacements for the links almost-instinct 09:31, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photos[edit]

Is just one photo of the man sufficient ? Are there none available from when he was younger ? -- Beardo (talk) 08:16, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure - this was a while ago - but I believe that the people who were looking for photos found that ones without copyright issues were scarce. The article could definitely benefit from more photos of PL, if legitimate ones could be found. The lack of them explains all the pictures of buildings.... almost-instinct 10:49, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Larkin, Needler Hall and Roger McGough[edit]

I brought this up some time ago, but now I have found reference to it in print (Roger McGough (2005), Said and Done Random House), see the link below (scroll down a page or so to find the Larkin reference):

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bHd10oHMycIC&pg=PT89&dq=Needler+Hall&hl=en&sa=X&ei=6rPUT_qcBImQ8QO6moS_Aw&ved=0CE0Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Needler%20Hall&f=false

The interaction of two poets, and Roger McGough is quite well known (and has been nationally recognised - he has a CBE), is of some note. Especially as his correspondence with McGough is one of the few recorded instances of Larkin encouraging an aspiring fellow poet.

Motion's apparent omission in not noting Larkin's connection to the university hall of residence in Cottingham should not take precedence over an eyewitness account. The university owned houses in Cottingham, the student residents of which ate meals at Needler Hall, it is possible that Larkin was not resident in the hall but took his evening meals there in a similar manner. It is certain, however, that he ate there, and gave a begrudging Latin grace before the evening meal. As this is all in a published book I think that the bald statement that Larkin was in lodgings in Cottingham when he started work at Hull should be modified. Urselius (talk) 15:21, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe I am convinced that the location of Larkin's evening meals is information sufficienty notable for this article. Or is there an angle to this I am missing? almost-instinct 21:16, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is of similar weight to the presence in the article of a reference to him living in digs in Cottingham - especially if he wasn't, at least initially.

Larkin was noted as being less than helpful to students, or even approachable (he extended the same attitude to members of university staff for that matter). Larkin's interaction with McGough is remarkable in that it is an uncharacteristic example of him encouraging a young and aspiring poet - McGough wrote to Larkin largely due to having come across him when he was a student living at the hall of residence. The anecdote about the umbrella that McGough gives is a priceless vignette of Larkin in and of itself. Urselius (talk) 07:07, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Currently the section in question reads: "In 1955 Larkin became University Librarian at the University of Hull, a post he would hold until his death. For his first year he lodged in bedsits." That second second sentence was including because in 1955 Larkin wrote "Mr Bleaney", his poem about lodging ("'This was Mr Bleaney's room'" it starts) almost-instinct 22:59, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have become somewhat stalled on the hall aspect. Is there anything in the article about Larkin interacting with or helping other poets? If he had done so, should not this be mentioned?

Larkin helped Amis out with writing Lucky Jim and this is mentioned, and he helped, with advice, McGough when he was starting out as a poet - worthy of a sentence I would opine. McGough was in the pop charts with the group "The Scaffold" in the 1960s ("Lilly the Pink" etc.) has published a large number of well received poetry collections and for many years has had a weekly poetry programme on BBC Radio 4 - and is the most widely known face, or voice, of poetry in the UK. He has quite a high profile. Urselius (talk) 07:40, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a separate section on his interaction (and/or lack of it) with other writers (eg also Barbara Pym) would be the way forward? The material on Amis might be happier in such a place? Maybe somewhere in the Legacy section? And might there be a better term than "Legacy"? (IIRC correctly that's just a standard suggested title) almost-instinct 10:17, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think a section on his interactions with other writers would be a useful addition. There is some coverage of the writers who influenced Larkin, so there should be a counterweight concerning his influence on others, and not just via his published work but also through his actions. Urselius (talk) 11:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weasel Words In Opening Sentence[edit]

The first sentence of this article is a textbook example of the use of weasel words (pls see WP:WEASEL for explanation of weasel words). One can't just make a passive statement like "Larkin is widely regarded as one of the great English poets of the latter half of the twentieth century" without any attribution of this judgement. Otherwise, it simply expresses a contributors POV in the passive voice. Still, I think it's possible to communicate Larkin's importance as a poet without using weasel words. However, it would require editors to use actual references, preferrably with direct quotation/s.Jpcohen (talk) 05:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very quick first reply: I thought that in line citations weren't supposed to be used in the lede? IIRC this was originally a quote from the Times' 50 Greatest Post-War Writers survey (?which placed him at number one) but I'll have to look closely at how it evolved. Meanwhile, pls could you make a suggested replacement? Thanks almost-instinct 22:12, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right, here is what was originally in the opening paragraph back in April 2008: "Larkin is commonly regarded as one of the greatest English poets of the latter half of the twentieth century. In 2003 Larkin was chosen as "the nation's best-loved poet" in a survey by the Poetry Book Society[1] and in 2008 The Times named Larkin as the greatest post-war writer[2]." The information in the second of those sentences has been moved away, leaving the first sentence on its own and looking unqualified. What would be the best way/s of using this information and/or rewriting the sentence to reflect this and correct the inadvertently created problem? almost-instinct 13:22, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would change the first sentence of the lede to something very simple like "Philip Larkin was an English poet and novelist." It looks like the lede already contains praise for Larkin as Poet Book Society's "best-loved poet" and The Times "greatest post-war writer" at the end of the lede. I think that would probably be a sufficient amount of praise, don't you?Jpcohen (talk) 16:14, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To tell the truth I've never looked at the guidelines for ledes and I think I'm right in saying that I've never edited this one. There was a stage a couple of years ago when there was some very intense discussion about what should be there (re: the contraversial elements) Normally when starting an article I do very plain first sentences like one you suggested; if anyone thinks that putting in a plain opening sentence undoes the balance that took some effort to be agreed on, could they pipe up, please? almost-instinct 16:38, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS now I come to look over it, it seems to me that the second sentence could benefit from being cut in half. almost-instinct 16:40, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone wants to look, the guidelines for citations in the lead are at WP:LEADCITE and for what to include at WP:MOSINTRO almost-instinct 14:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish Wikipedia[edit]

A translation of this page on the Spanish Wikipedia has just been awarded Featured Article status. The irony of this is ... well, something ;-) almost-instinct 13:03, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Larkin's women[edit]

There is discussion starting at Talk:Patsy Strang on what to do with Patsy Strang and Monica Jones. Merge them here into a dedicated section (Larkin's personal relationships?), merge them together into a standalone article Philip Larkin's women?, leave them as they are, or simply redirect the titles here? SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 13:32, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted my thoughts on that talkpage almost-instinct 15:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is now Relationships that influenced Philip Larkin, which should be linked to in this article on the man.211.225.33.104 (talk) 01:09, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is linked through Patsy Strang but I have put a {{See also}} at the start of the section to make it more obvious. Keith D (talk) 11:09, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article - broken CSS[edit]

This article exhibits the usual broken Wikipedia CSS: delivering low resolution feature-phone-type content to high resolution devices with better-than-desktop resolution, forcing users to accept the poor user experience resulting from the poor web design or else scroll to the end of the page and click a link to request a suitable version of the page (so-called 'Desktop'). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.215.14 (talk) 00:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Philip Larkin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120219233140/http://www.philiplarkin.com/events/larkin25.html to http://www.philiplarkin.com/events/larkin25.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Philip Larkin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:38, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CE[edit]

Tidied citations and references which had harv error warnings all over them, by replacing citation with cite book etc.Keith-264 (talk) 21:59, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Philip Larkin. 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) 22:45, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Philip Larkin. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100209023404/http://www.philiplarkin.com/biog.htm to http://www.philiplarkin.com/biog.htm
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0403/is_n2_v42/ai_19259725/pg_4?tag=artBody%3Bcol1

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) 06:20, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All What Jazz or All that Jazz[edit]

This article, in quite an early section, gives the title of one of Larkin's works as "All What Jazz", but I thought that it was called "All That Jazz". Vorbee (talk) 08:29, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The book given is ISBN 9780571134762 which is ""All What Jazz". Keith D (talk) 15:41, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's mentioined here and it's for sale e.g. here. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:53, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Philip Larkin. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111006180228/http://www.ihull.org/larkin/ to http://www.ihull.org/larkin/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111006180228/http://www.ihull.org/larkin/ to http://www.ihull.org/larkin/

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) 05:35, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of "loss of modernism" needs clarification.[edit]

" In Hawkes's view, "Larkin's poetry ... revolves around two losses": the "loss of modernism", which manifests itself as "the desire to find a moment of epiphany", and "the loss of England, or rather the loss of the British Empire, which requires England to define itself in its own terms when previously it could define 'Englishness' in opposition to something else."[93]" and the phrase "loss of modernism" is unclear. Further down the article says that Larkin not unwillingly acquired a reputations as "an enemy of modernism". So why would his poetry revolve around the loss of something he hated? And what would that even mean? The reference is to a hard copy book that I can't consult. How about a quote from the book long enough that readers can see from the context what "modernism" refers to here? Arctic Gazelle (talk) 18:37, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Larkin 25 into Philip Larkin[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To not merge, given the uncontested objection with stale discussion; a merge would detract from the primary topic. Klbrain (talk) 09:03, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of overlap between the two articles. Randykitty (talk) 19:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose seems excessively long and detailed to merge into the main Larkin article. Jahaza (talk) 19:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's "excessively long and detailed" because it repeats a lot of the main article and because it contains a lot of trivial stuff... --Randykitty (talk) 19:47, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, then edit the article down to something that should be merged. Jahaza (talk) 20:18, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge. With the trivia and duplicated material were removed it wouldn't add much text to this article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:59, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose not really suitable for dumping in the main article. It is fine as a separate article. Keith D (talk) 01:34, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

When did Larkin retire as a librarian?[edit]

There is a brief mention that Larkin worked for the university library for thirty years, but nothing is said about when he retired or why. Very odd that such an omission has survived in a Featured Article. Moonraker (talk) 11:26, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems he never did retire. This source says "When he died in 1985 at the age of sixty-three, he had not, in fact, written any poems to speak of for some years, but he was still working as a librarian." Martinevans123 (talk) 12:11, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also this: "Though the continued cutbacks made Larkin contemplate retiring, he did not. He died in office. In the summer of 1985 he became ill with cancer. By November he was too sick to attend Maeve Brennan's retirement party. On 2 December he died." Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He never retired, he died in office as librarian although had been progressively more and more ill for a while. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:46, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]