Talk:Robert Kaske

Robert Kaske is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 5, 2023.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 27, 2021	Good article nominee	Listed
August 29, 2021	Featured article candidate	Promoted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 27, 2019. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that, in rejecting so-called "New Criticism", Robert Kaske* argued that medieval poetry needs to be read in context?*
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 8, 2023.
Current status: Featured article

Biography: Science and Academia

	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 science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Ohio Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ohio portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio (assessed as Low-importance).

Split into bibliography?[edit]

The bibliography of this article is quite large and I think it'd be a good idea to split it into a separate article. The prose and the bibliography are each large enough to justify splitting- thoughts? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:28, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, or maybe keep it here but trim the section. Not sure if the *full* collection should be listed on Wikipedia. PhotographyEdits (talk) 10:38, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a split proposal to the top- discussion can occur here. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ping for FA promoter @Usernameunique MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:03, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping. There are several clear detriments to splitting the article, without (from what I can tell) any clear benefits. As several of Kaske's colleagues commented, his published output was both relatively modest and disproportionately influential. Per Sowell 1989, "so many of his articles, even the shorter ones, constituted seminal studies". For example, Kaske's article on the Sutton Hoo spoons—the reason I wrote this article in the first place—is a standard on the subject yet, in the article on Kaske, bears passing mentions a single time in a nine-clause sentence. Per Brown 1986, meanwhile, "If we were working in the sciences, where team research is routine, Bob Kaske's bibliography would be many times its present length." Thus, despite extensive efforts to create a complete bibliography—not an easy task for one who died before the internet came of age—the article still lists fewer than 100 works. Splitting the article into two would therefore create disjointed lists while not removing much from this article. Meanwhile, the benefit of splitting remains unclear. The article is less than 3,000 words long, while the relevant guideline states that at even twice that length, "Length alone does not justify division or trimming." The MOS, for its part, states that "Lists of published works should be included for authors", and that "Complete lists of works ... are encouraged, particularly when such lists are not already freely available on the internet." --Usernameunique (talk) 04:46, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification, I understand what you mean. Removed split tag MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 10:26, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, MyCatIsAChonk. Appreciate it. --Usernameunique (talk) 15:59, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Date of birth and death.[edit]

Date of birth and death are wrong.

174.17.179.132 (talk) 16:16, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]