Talk:Ezra Pound

Cantos absent?

The introduction feels unsatisfactory in that it doesn't mention the Cantos and that it features a typically-opaque Kenner squib. It seems to me that long after there is no-one alive who cares what Modernism and Imagism were, there will be people who read and love (or hate) the Cantos. I'm a fairly-serious student of EP, and while I respect Kenner's achievement, he doesn't belong in the introductory paragraph.

Absent some push-back, I will adjust the introduction to include the Cantos and exclude Kenner Tim Bray 09:09, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I agree. This article is on my list of things to do once The Cantos is finished, but if you want to do it, great. The Pound article could be 3 times its curent size. Filiocht 08:44, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)

Scholarship statements NPOV

This portion: It is worth noting he was a shoddy scholar, and was always looking to cut corners. His translations often have laughable errors. His Chinese translations especially are not taken terribly serious. doesn't sound like NPOV. A reputable encyclopedia article would not contain the word "shoddy". I request that someone refine this, and perhaps through in examples of poor quality in his translation. Kricxjo 16:17, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)

The following sounds like an editorial rather than a set of facts about Pound. Scholarship was not, of course, the point. Literal translations were not his intention; Pound was a poet, not an academic scholar. His concern was to breathe new air into voices of antiquity. Reading Confucius in English is quite different from reading it in the original. The question was how to translate a text so it lives again, almost as a contemporary work, in a new language and new time.- 26 september

Pound's translations were often creative exercises, focused more on making a good poem than cobbling together a crib sheet, ie, a word to word bridge from the original into contemporary English. [cf (Sullivan "Ezra Pound and Sextus Propertius: A Study in Creative Translation" Texas, 1964) and EP on how logopoeia, melopoeia and phanopoeia make a "good poem" (ABC of Reading)] ~Mark Witucke 21 May, 2007

Filiocht rewrite

If anyone is interested, I am rewriting this article at User:Filiocht/Ezra Pound and intend moving that rewrite to here when completed unless anyone objects? Filiocht 12:01, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Here's the text I am overwriting for handy reference (Filiocht 14:45, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)):

Ezra Weston Loomis Pound (October 30, 1885 - November 1, 1972) was a poet and critic who, along with T. S. Eliot, was one of the major figures of the modernist movement in early 20th century poetry. He was the driving force behind several modernist movements, notably Imagism and Vorticism.

Hugh Kenner, on meeting Pound: "I suddenly knew that I was in the presence of the center of modernism."

Pound was born in Hailey, Idaho. He was educated at the University of Pennsylvania (where at age 16, he met William Carlos Williams, then a young medical student) and at Hamilton College. He taught at Wabash College for less than a year, and afterward settled in London, after months in Venice. He had thought W. B. Yeats was the greatest living poet, and befriended him in England. His intelligence, confidence and verve found him a place in London's premier artistic circles. He married Dorothy Shakespear in 1914. In 1924, he moved to Italy, settling in Rapallo.

Pound's early books created a sensation in England, and he was considered the cutting edge in the years just prior to World War I. Yeats was moved by Pound's work to modify his own style, abandoning the pre-Raphaelite techniques that characterized his early poetry.

He lived in the Montparnasse Quarter of Paris, France for a time during the gathering of great artists. Frequently, Pound could be seen at the café Le Dome, playing chess on the terrace with Ford Madox Ford.

In the early 30s Pound moved to Rapallo, Italy. Economics became his obsession and Mussolini his great hope. He compared the Fascist to the princes of Renaissance Italy. During World War II he volunteered to speak on cultural subjects on Italian radio. The broadcasts are overtly political, however, and his political sentiments were clear enough: he hated Roosevelt, and the usury of world banking - which he pinned on the Jews. The Allies would lose the war, he thought. And wars were needless--they were started only to create debt--he thought.

After the war he was incarcerated outdoors in an open cage (the infamous "gorilla cage") at Pisa for twenty-five days, then for medical reasons (he considered himself broken by his time in the cage) in a tent. During the six months spent at Pisa living with the American GIs he worked on his translation of Confucius and wrote the Pisan Cantos.

"The enormous tragedy of the dream in the peasant's bent/ shoulders" they begin, written on scraps of paper and using a typewriter in the medical tent after-hours. For books, Pound had the Chinese of Confucius, possibly James Legge's translation too, a Chinese dictionary, all of which he pocketed before the MPs took him away, an anthology of verse he found at the latrine, & a standard military issue Bible. The setting of these Cantos is as much Pound's memory, specifically of London, as the Italian landscape, and the collapse of Fascist Italy.

He was transferred to the US and tried for treason, found insane and subsequently imprisoned in a mental institution in Washington, D.C. (St. Elizabeth's Hospital) for 12 years.

Distinguished and recognized writers, in spite of Pound's politics, awarded him the Bollingen-Library of Congress Award for the Pisan Cantos.

Repeated appeals from writers earned him release from the hospital in 1958, and he returned to Italy, settling in Venice, where he was to complete his life.

In terms of his views on translation, the back cover of Pound's Confucius offers, "Pound never wanted to be a literal translator. What he could do, as no other could, is to identify the essence, pick out 'what matters now,' and phrase it so pungently, so beautifully, that it will stick in the head and start new thinking."

The 800-odd paged Cantos, which Pound described as "a poem including history", was his major work. The two line haiku-like In a Station of the Metro is well known and frequently anthologized.

Allen Ginsberg said, "He was the poet of the age." after the news came that Pound had died.

In addition to his poetry, Pound would be remembered as a great advocate for poets, the classics, the arts; in fact, as he viewed it, he was pushing for a new civilization. He tirelessly promoted artists he thought were creating innovative, good work. Upon seeing Robert Frost's first book and recognizing his talent, he took up Frost in England and quickly became an informal advocate. He was instrumental or absolutely vital in getting James Joyce, William Carlos Williams, and T. S. Eliot published. Eliot's "The Waste Land" was heavily pared by Pound, which led Eliot to dedicate the poem to him, "the better craftsman" (in Italian, which were Dante's words.) Pound wrote extensively on the arts, including a book-length "Guide to Kulchur", and "ABC of Reading". Charles Olson, one of many directly influenced by "Old Ez", expressed at Berkeley in 1965, his thought that Pound had freed the languages of the world.

"The thought of what America would be like/ If the classics had a wide circulation/ Ah, well, it troubles my sleep."

"No man ever knows enough about any art." (Guide to Kulchur)

Article too reverent

I'm sorry, but this article is far too reverent. Pound's reputation as a poet is very much open to question, and the article should reflect that. There were numerous qualifications in the earlier versions that seem to have been systematically removed. Things I have a problem with:

- why include the Kenner quote at all?

-"he convinced his mentor to adopt a more direct way of writing, helping to bring about Yeats' mature style." This interpretation of Yeat's development has been in question for thirty years now, since Harold Bloom's study.

• • • But mss and typescripts of Yeats poems with Pound's (accepted) suggestions exist. Filiocht 12:45, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

-"His translations of Japanese Noh plays influenced Yeats' writing" - Pound didn't translate from Japanese; he didn't know Japanese, and the only influence on Yeats was the idea of Noh drama rather than any actual texts

• • • Pounds workings of Noh plays from Felonosa's notes were well known to Yeats. Filiocht 12:45, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

-for that matter, why have the references to Pound's exaggeration of his translation skills been removed? Is there some reason that people looking up information on Pound should not be told that he didn't know Chinese or Japanese?

-"Imagism and Vorticism. These two movements, which helped bring to notice the work of poets and artists like James Joyce" - neither of those movements had anything to do with Joyce

• • • Joyce was in the Imigast anthology. Filiocht 12:45, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

-"can be seen as perhaps the central events in the birth of English-language modernism." or perhaps not

• • • • Hence the perhaps. Filiocht 12:45, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

-"The Cantos, which he began in 1915, pointed his way forward." I don't find this to be a NPOV statement; some of us - a lot of us - think The Cantos were a complete wrong turn that went nowhere.

• • • Clearly refers to Pound's way forward. Filiocht 12:45, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

-"Pound was one of the first to successfully employ free verse in extended compositions." somehow it has to be noted that many do not consider his efforts successful

-"He also translated and championed Greek and Latin classics and helped keep these alive for poets at a time when classical education was in decline." Pound did not do that much classical translation, and I don't think he's ever been considered particularly important in keeping classical learning going. User:66.190.242.110 4:12, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Why not create a user account and add what you feel you want added? Filiocht

Facism and Anti-Semitism

I could not source the statement that Ezra Pound's anti-semitic leanings had their genesis at the University of Idaho. According to the University of Idaho library, though he was a fixture within its library, his tastes in reading ran more to the left and radicalism than towards facism. I removed the statement. Can someone source it correctly?

Most scholars agree that Pound's anti-semitism dates from the 1930s, and almost everybody misses the fact that there is more anti-Christian and anti-Buddhist sentiment in his writings than anti-Jewish. While not at all wishing to deny that Pound was, for a long period of time, clearly anti-semitic, this article seems to be overly concerned with this aspect of his life, to the detriment of any serious discussion of the important role he played in 20th C English-language poetry. Now that I have finished working on The Cantos, I hope to do some work here, meanwhile I absolutely agree that theis statement should be removed until a decent attribution is given. Filiocht 08:57, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

No other person researched this aspect of his life? --Duemellon 14:43, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

_________
Pound's views on money, banks, conspiracy changed after he read Willis A. Overholser's A Short Review and Analysis of the History of Money in the United States (published by the author, Libertyville, Ill., 1936.) As if he learned most of what he knew from this book; or the very least was guided by this book in a certain direction. Overholser was also the name of the superintendent of St. Elizabeth. Pound probably heard and learned more about the Jews from the social crediters in England than at Idaho University. --nt351 2008 June 17 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.60.108.102 (talk) 17:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, the page contained an allegation that one of Pound's frequent visitors at St. Elizabeth's was the "then-chairman of the States' Rights Democratic Party" and that Pound "used to discuss strategy and tactics on how best to rally public support for the preservation of racial segregation in the American South." This statement was not cited, and a Google search revealed no sources. While this certainly could be true, it is a large enough allegation that it should be properly documented if it is to remain. Josiahseale 19:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

It strikes me as somewhat bizarre that the article refers to "the charge of antisemitism" as if there is argument as to whether or not Pound was an antisemite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.83.31.1 (talk) 16:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the speaker above. In Kenner's book on Pound, he tends to skirt the anti-Semitism somewhat, but he does talk about the origins of Pound's crank views on money in the works of the founder of Social Credit, Major Douglas. Douglas is noted in at least one of the Cantos, so there is no doubt Pound knew of him, and probably read him. And Douglas too, along with other Social Crediters, was anti-Semitic, because they tended to associate bankers with Jews, and usury specifically with Jewish bankers. As to Pound's anti-Semitism, this was not a mere passing phase, but a long-held and elaborated view. If you read the radio transcripts, you will find some absolutely venomous stuff, and I think the article needs to reflect this aspect of Pound's beliefs, since it bears directly on any claim staked in the Cantos to creating a poetic history of the western tradition, which means that it also bears directly on Pound's claim to be a major American poet. On the subjects of both money and anti-Semitism (as they colour Pound's work and life) the article is essentially misleading, and soft-pedals both subjects. Theonemacduff (talk) 23:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Someone left a note

User:Hippopotamus left a note at the new user log that relates to this article [1]. I'll put this note here and on Talk:The Cantos. — Trilobite (Talk) 6 July 2005 15:18 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. it doesn't look like a copyvio problem or even too much plagarism, but rather is asking for a reference/credit where his book has been quoted. I'm not sure which sections are in question, but the book is

ISBN 370520405X A Beginner's Guide to The Cantos of Ezra Pound, Roland John

This seems fair enough; and, assuming the book was referenced/quoted, would also be the proper thing to do. -- Solipsist 6 July 2005 15:39 (UTC)

I couldn't see myself where he thought his book was quoted either, but rather than go trawling through I thought it best to just note the message here and leave it for those who've worked on the article to determine if it was an oversight and his book was used or if there is just a coincidental similarity somewhere. — Trilobite (Talk) 6 July 2005 16:09 (UTC)

(Also posted on Talk:The Cantos.) Trilobite, I don't think Hippopotamus is alleging plagiarism, but simply proper use of his book, which he wants to see referenced. I've left a note on Hippopotamus' talk page, telling him that Filiocht is the author of The Cantos and also (I think) the main presence behind Ezra Pound. Filiocht is on holiday, but likely to return quite soon, so I asked if Hippopotamus would like to tell me more about it, so I can take care of referencing his work and anything else that arises, or would rather wait for Filiocht. Bishonen | talk 6 July 2005 16:37 (UTC)

Well I would tend to call the use of a source without citing it plagiarism, particularly where it would involve the use of someone's interpretation of a literary work rather than a simple fact, though you're probably right that Hippopotamus wasn't suggesting dishonesty but an oversight. By the way, in case there was any doubt, I wouldn't dream of accusing Filiocht of plagiarism, and I was pretty sceptical about the suggestion myself, so I was just leaving notification of the message from Hippopotamus, no more than that. — Trilobite (Talk) 6 July 2005 16:57 (UTC)

I have never read this book. Filiocht | Talk 08:42, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

About Pound's Incarceration

I found this section confusing, & frankly incoherent. Obviously, there are numerous opinions over his involuntary committment to St. Elizabeth's. (From what I remember in college, the usual explanation for it was that 1. if we wasn't clearly insane before, his stay in a military prison had made him now, & 2. better an indefinite stay in a relatively safe mental institution than risk a trial for treason & a possible death sentence.) However, these various opinions are presented in a confusing variety of ways:

• We are told that "Pound was conceited and flamboyant", which is why he was misdiagnosed. This is an unattributed opinion that could be assumed to be a medical fact.

• His incarceration is explaned as an abuse of government powers. This evades the fact he was accused of having committed treason, an offense for which other individuals were executed (e.g., William Joyce) at the time.

• Now we reach an attributed POV -- "E. Fuller Torrey believed that Mussolini's propagandist was coddled by Winfred Overholser, the superintendent of St. Elizabeths." I guess by "coddled" he means that Pound was not treated as badly as the average mental inmate of the time -- which was very bad. Also, the phrase "Mussolini'd propagandist" is quite strong considering how little attention had been given previously to his infamous radio broadcasts.

• Then we are told that he had a large number of unsavory visitors -- including an unnamed "then-chairman of the States' Rights Democratic Party" -- although we have practically no description of his more savory, intelligensia visitors. (I'm not arguing whether this is a fact: it is clear that being a famous intellectual & anti-Semite, he would attract a number of visitors of that ilk.)

• Guy Davenport's work to rehabilitate Pound's reputation is intrusive, & IMNSHO wrong: I took a class on Pound in 1979, & even in the late 1970s his influence on 20th century poetry was widely admitted (I can recall only one professor in college who disagreed with this assessment). At the time, Hugh Kenner was the primary academic authority on Pound & his books were quite respected. (FWIW, Eustace Mullins, who claimed to be Pound's "official biographer" -- & whose article led me here -- was entirely ignored, although Pound's antisemitism wasn't.)

• While the sentence about Pound's release is perfectly fine, the diagnosis is a bit misleading: if he was arguably sane while in St Elizabeth's, then he could stand trial for treason; if he was still insane, then he had to remain committed. (The mentally ill, in those days, were always institutionalized.) The solution was, in effect, a compromise: the government could continue to claim he was nuts -- to defend his committment & why they dropped the case; while his supporters accepted his de facto exile to Italy (a punishment, but still better than prison).

I'd rewrite this section myself, but I'm unfamiliar with the secondary literature. - llywrch 18:12, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Frances Gregg's Gender

A recent addition to this article identified Frances Gregg as a man and stated that both Ezra Pound and H.D. were romantically involved with Frances. I found this puzzling--while H.D.'s bisexuality is well documented, I had never heard of Pound ever becoming sexually involved with a man. A google search and a look at "The Life of Ezra Pound" by Noel Stock soon made it clear that Frances Scott was a woman. I know the male version of Frances is usually spelled FrancIs, but I assumed Gregg was merely going by an unconventional spelling.

This same mistake appeared in the article about H.D. and has since been corrected.

Devil Doll 20:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Gay Lobby tried, but evidently failed, this time. I'm sure they'll try again.Lestrade 22:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Lestrade

I've just removed the reference, which read: H.D. also became involved with a woman named Frances Gregg around this time. Shortly afterward, H.D. and Gregg, along with Gregg's mother, went to Europe. If anyone wants to put it back, please first explain here why these lines, whatever gender anyone is, belong in the article on Ezra Pound. Strawberryjampot (talk) 18:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

A SERIOUS REEDIT

Given Pound's centrality, I think this article is in need of a major reedit. I've tried to start this by fixing some errors (grammatical mainly) and by adding a paragraph on Cathay. The treatment of Pound's works seems cursory and uneven. There are also too few references. In my opinion, filling out the entry should precede debates about Pound's politics, etc. Help!!Benzocane 17:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Cultural depictions of Ezra Pound

I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information. I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list. Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article. Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion, I'd like to suggest this as a model for the editors here. Regards, Durova 16:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Why does text disappear?

How come the full text of this article doesn't load sometimes? Specifically, the part about Eustace Mullins visiting Pound at St. Elizabeth's? Strange.

This problem appears to be fixed now.

Neutral presentation

Hi all. I like this article. I made some changes here in order to make the writing more encyclopedically neutral. If any of those - howevers - are part of a particular source's argument then feel free to restore using cites and quote marks. AlanBarnet 04:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the helpful edits. The changes look fine to me. Paul 14:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem Paul. Its my habit to make argumentative phrasing more neutral. In this article's case it seems to be inadvertent. In other cases it can be deliberate (in cases of promotional soapboxing. Neutrality is not that easy to maintain on Wikipedia. Luckily in this case it should be fairly easy. AlanBarnet 07:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Location of DTC

I believe the camp where Pound was imprisoned was to the north of central Pisa, near the intersection of the Via Aurelia and the Via Giordano Bruno. This is not near Tirrenia, which is southwest of the city center. Deor 03:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Poor article

This simply seems to be a poor and cursory biography of Pound. His actual interaction with modernism just seems to be skimmed over and mentioned, but with no mention of HOW he developed modernism and what advice/criticism he gave as a critic of modernists. I'm reading a biography on Pound, and if I can catch some free time, I'll help this article. It focuses far too much on his Antisemitism IMO. I'll make my edits ADD to the article instead of taking out information, and if anyone finds me in the wrong, feel free to revert. 66.65.193.128 03:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with this utterly. The Poetry section focuses way too much on Pound's work in music and far too less on his entire oeuvre, of which his work on music was, albeit important, only a fraction. Someone needs to re-write the poetry section and there should maybe be a literary criticism section as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.216.75.225 (talk) 11:32, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Minor Scandal

As in this from the article:

Afterward, Pound taught at Wabash College in Crawfordsville, Indiana, for less than a year, and left as the result of a minor scandal. In 1908 he traveled to Europe, settling in London after spending several months in Venice.

Heavens to Betsy, this is like making kids jump for Snickers bars and keeping them just out of their reach ... or like holding out red meat before a wild dog ... whatever. Don't mention a scandal unless you are going to explain it; never, ever, ever, ever.

Wasn't that the thing where they took a dim view of him having a woman in his room?

Yes, fixed that. Philip Cross (talk) 19:44, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Death

Does anyone know how he died? Can't find that information anywhere. 82.163.144.250 10:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

References/Sources are there - why tag?

This article seems to list many, many references and sources - they are just not individually and specifically footnoted. They definitely should be (for example, the claim that Mussolini was not an anti-Semite should be footnoted with specific reference to a work and a specific page, etc.), but just because they're not, does that mean that this should have the References/Sources tag? The refs/sources are listed in detail, they just don't have the specific footnotes, which, again, they should, but that doesn't mean that the article is missing references/sources altogether, as the tag would suggest. OR is it a matter of Wikipedia Style Guidelines that articles without specific footnotes, regardless of the quantity and quality of their refs/sources, should get the refs/sources tag(s)? Srajan01 06:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the tag makes sense: it states that this article or section doesn't cite sources - those sections indeed don't cite anything. Having a list of books in a references section is meaningless if you don't state what content was pulled from what and where - at best such a list can demonstrate notability, reliable sources, or some such, but definitely not factual accuracy, verifiability, or no original research. Quite honestly, this article is a mess and I've been looking around for some of the books cited in an effort to adequately cite the article and make it respond to some of the criticisms listed in the talk page(s) above. --Meowist 22:17, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree, everything should be referenced.--Gloriamarie 17:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Insanity section

This section is quite unbalanced at the moment and seems to give commentary (is Wikipedia to decide that Pound's actions weren't those of an insane man?) I inserted a (printed) reference stating that Pound was declared insane by a federal jury; the paragraph later claimed that Pound was declared insane by "the authorities" which does not exactly denote a jury. If the insanity plea was indeed controversial, let's have a reference for that. And what about this?

"Pound's controversial insanity plea is mirrored by the fate of Norwegian author and collaborator Knut Hamsun, who was dubbed insane by embarrassed authorities despite evidence in the form of subsequent published material to the contrary."

What does that have to do with Ezra Pound? That is equating his actions directly with Hamsun's, finding them both guilty, and saying that a jury and "embarrassed" authorities wrongly found them both insane-- all pretty damning accusations. This stuff needs reliable sources directly equating Pound to Hamsun, reliable sources saying Hamsun and Pound are shown guilty by the evidence, and reliable evidence showing a mistake was made with the insanity pleas or it's just POV commentary that has no place on Wikipedia.--Gloriamarie 17:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Apparently no action was taken on this, but I agree with the above. If the parallel between the cases of Pound and Hamsun has been discussed by respected researchers, then it can be included with a proper reference. There are references in the paragraph but as far as can be told they aren't references to any scholars saying that the cases are parallel, which is like saying "Pound was a traitor like Benedict Arnold" and then backing that up with a reference to a biography of Benedict Arnold. But without such reference -- that is, a reference to legitimate scholars making the comparison -- the statement in this article comparing Pound and Hamsun is both POV and original research. I propose deleting it, unless someone can provide a reference to scholars who discuss the two cases as specifically comparable. Strawberryjampot (talk) 18:58, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Since there's been no discussion, I've deleted the Hamsun reference. Please note again that the justification for deleting it is that the comparison of the two cases is POV and original research if it's made only by a Wikipedia contributor. I'd agree that references to respectable sources that make the comparison would be acceptable. Strawberryjampot (talk) 18:51, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't know the historical details, but as an attorney the article is unclear: whether someone is incompetent to stand trial at the moment is a completely separate and distinct question from someone asserting the affirmative defense that they were legally insane at the time they committed a crime. Indeed, they 're mutually exclusive, at least simultaneously: if someone's incompetent to stand trial, they're incompetent to enter a plea, so Pound couldn't have plead "not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect" if he'd been found incompetent and not restored to competence. Which is it? DevilLawyer (talk) 16:27, 27 December 2008 (UTC) DevilLawyer

Link to William Carlos William

The link that exists in the file to William Carlos William, points the wrong writer. If you examine the birth and death date you realize that Mr. Pound could have never met him. However there is another author, with the same name, with whom he was friends. There is no Wikipedia article to that author, so the link should not exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.74.123.226 (talk) 17:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The link is correct. Someone or other vandalized the dates in the WCW article ealier today, but they've been reverted. Deor 19:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Shortwave broadcasts from Italy were heard in the U.S.

According to William Carlos Williams, he was approached by people who had heard Pound refer to "Old Doc Williams in Rutherford, NJ" during a broadcast. He then listened to Pound's broadcasts himself. Further research should be done to source this, but, in the meantime, the implication that nobody heard the broadcasts in the U.S. should be removed from the article.

I'll try to get a source for the Williams information...

Adam Holland 15:32, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Poems

The link: Ezra Pound Poems was tentatively included in the link section, but apparently an editor removed it. Perhaps it should be emphasized that it was no spam (just not my type of thing): indeed, those poems cannot be found elsewhere online, not even on Gutenberg. Actually, about 80% of them can be found at poemhunter or at American Poems yet not all in one single page. If someone feels like including the link, can certainly do it. In a page about Ezra Pound, it seems to belong; particularly if no links to his poems are present yet, and if other resources do not provide them and/or do not list them in one page. That was the rationale (I think sensible) behind the attempt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.10.57.118 (talk) 11:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I removed the link because the site linked to appears to be some kind of social network/forum (it bills itself as "an innovative website for personal or professional advertisement profiles"), and linking to it is therefore discouraged by WP:EL. Deor (talk) 12:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Well I know that perfection doesn't belong to this world - said without irony, actually. It's a fact. However, since we have no links to Pound's poems and the few sites that provide them are all of a somewhat commercial nature, and all the other pages previously mentioned have the poems (though not in one page) and yet have also all banners and the alike, I thought that, somehow, a link to Ezra Pound's poems was none the less useful and an important feature to have on Pound at wikipedia.

A guideline may discourage this or that practice, but if it doesn't forbid it, the rationale exposed above has still some validity. I leave this entirely to your judgement, but a link to Ezra's poems is badly needed, at that page didn't look unprofessional - actually, I picked it exactly because, compared with the others, appeared the one with less frills and more consistency: once skipped the headers, the middle body is all Pound's stuff without the readers' comments in the way like at American Poems and Poemhunter, and without the glitzy animated banners at Poemhunter. It looked more sober, that is. You judge. Thank you anyway for your time and dedication. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.10.57.118 (talk) 12:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

why does Robert Anton Wilson mention Pound?

"Pound was also interested in mysticism and the occult, but biographers have only recently begun to document his work in those fields. Leon Surrette wrote extensively of Pound's involvement in mysticism in The Birth of Modernism." <-- I wonder if that is part of the reason that in RAW's "Schrodinger's Cat" trilogy the poet Ezra Pound is often used as the fake author of the troublemaker Chaney's letters to powerful organizations... Was RAW trying to imply something about this noteable poet of which most people -- at the time of the Cat trilogy -- were not aware? Interesting... 68.149.190.31 (talk) 00:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Jewish?

Hi was Ezra Pound Jewish? The reason that I ask is because Ezra is a common Jewish name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SceneandHeard (talk • contribs) 05:00, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

No, he wasn't. Deor (talk) 05:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

With questions like that, no wonder he went crazy! :)

The Occult?

The article states that Pound was interested in occultism or mysticism. In what forms--Theosophy? Classical Hermetic arts like astrology? Esoteric Christianity? What? --Dawud —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.167.172.25 (talk) 10:27, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

With questions like that, no wonder he went crazy! :)

Antisemic

The reason I ask if Ezra Pound is Jewish with his Jewish sounding name is because perhaps his antisemic beliefs was to mask his Jewish background. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SceneandHeard (talk • contribs) 13:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

As I said above, he had no Jewish background. Old Testament names were (and are) frequently given to children by U.S. Protestants. Deor (talk) 13:55, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

External links

I've reverted the deletion of numerous external links, not because I want to argue they all belong in the article, but because it seems clear that a change of this nature and extent shouldn't be made without discussion, or even explanation, on the Talk page. If anyone wants to revise this section so drastically, please discuss it here first. Strawberryjampot (talk) 15:35, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

One link was dead, the one added just before my edit was to somebody's essay for a college course (as the dead one also appeared to be), one duplicated a link in the Audio section, and the others did not "provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article" (WP:ELNO). I have my doubts about the last one ("Ezra Pound Speaking") as well, since I suspect that the texts on the site are copyvios. I'm reverting your revert. Deor (talk) 15:57, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Main picture

Do you think it is NPOV to have EP's main (and only) picture in this article be his mugshot. The first thing anyone sees is that he's been arrested. There are plenty of excellent pictures that are more characteristic of EP as a whole. I suggest that the main picture be changed. If the mugshot picture is to be retained, it should be lower in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maverickenough (talk • contribs) 01:27, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

absolutely true. Having that mug shot is decidedly not NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.127.98.2 (talk) 16:16, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

what the hell? just because you think the guy deserves to have his wikipedia page started by a mugshot doesn't mean it's OK.

93.139.42.223 (talk) 10:55, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I fully agree that the mug shot is prejudicial, certainly as the main picture. I think it should be removed: it's so very POV that it would be better to have no leading picture than that one. This has nothing to do with whether whether Pound's admitted anti-Semitism and alleged (he was never convicted) treasonous activities should be suppressed: of course they shouldn't. The POV comes in in saying or implying that these aspects of his life are generally considered the most important things about him as a literary and historical figure, which is factually not true (factually meaning not the facts of what he did but the fact of what people, especially scholars and critics, now think of him.) Strawberryjampot (talk) 15:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Apparently someone removed the picture, then someone else reverted the removal on the grounds that it hadn't been explained. I exhort people to do this in a more orderly way. I propose the following for discussion: The mug shot shouldn't be the lead or the only image. Accordingly, for the present the mug shot image should be removed, even if we don't have another image to replace it. Once a more appropriate lead image is found, then we can discuss adding the mug shot as an additional image farther down the page. If after ten days or so there's no objection to this proposal, or if discussion indicates a consensus to remove the image, then someone should remove it, with a reference on the edit history list to this discussion. Thanks. Strawberryjampot (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think anything so formal is needed. I'll remove the image, with an edit summary directing folk to this conversation. I can't really see anyone objecting to the removal; I think it was just that it was unexplained that caused the reversion. Deor (talk) 17:39, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, that's fine with me; I was just trying to avoid triggering an edit war. If anyone disagrees about removing the image, please discuss here first before further reverts or revisions. Thanks. Strawberryjampot (talk) 18:54, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with the removal of the picture. It is the only photo we have, so it is not a matter of choosing a mugshot from among many options. It is a matter of putting a face to the name in an article about the man. It is a fact that he was arrested, which the article discusses. I don't see that there is any neutrality issue with portraying him as arrested. He was, so what's the problem? Is getting arrested inherently bad? I suppose Jesus Christ, Thomas More, and Nelson Mandela are horrible people, with the black mark of arrest on their records and all. You blush too easily. That said, if a better image of Pound is available, it should be used. Srnec (talk) 01:04, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

The problem is a matter of balance. Pound was arrested and accused of treason: so include that information. But the judgment of history so far is that that fact is significant but is not the most important thing about him: Pound is not generally considered as a fascist who happened to write poetry, but as a poet who was attracted to fascism. Giving a picture like that such prominence, by making it the only one and putting it at the top of the page, clearly suggests the former view of him, whereas the view of scholars and historians is generally the latter. Hence, using that picture as the lead and only one distorts the scholarly consensus on Pound, and is therefor POV. Strawberryjampot (talk) 02:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Do you think I'm disputing the importance of Pound's arrest? Or the "view of scholars"? There is no other image available. I suggest that a mugshot is better than no image at all. There are currently no other options. I don't see how this is a "balance" issue. No image implies unimportance, if you ask me. Viewers are less likely to read this article without an image, and if they read it they will realise what the mugshot is for. If they don't they won't, but who cares? Anybody judging a man just by one photo is not one whose opinion I care about. Srnec (talk) 05:04, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I disagree that "a mugshot is better than no image at all" (but then, I wouldn't gripe if WP had no images whatever). If you want to include the mugshot at a suitable point in the "Italy" subsection, that would be appropriate; but I agree with Strawberryjampot that it's not appropriate for the infobox image. I don't really understand the niceties of image copyright, but I don't see why the 1913 Coburn photo (which I believe used to be in the article) wouldn't be in the public domain in the United States, though I can see why copyright is claimed in Britain, since Alvin Langdon Coburn hasn't been dead for 70 years. Deor (talk) 05:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

That image was once in the article. I haven't a clue why it can't be. The reason I prefer an image than no image is strategic: I believe users of this encyclopedia are more interested in reading when there are regular images. Sure some articles overdo it, but a main image at the top right of the article never hurts. And ultimately this encyclopedia is designed to be read. (I wouldn't mind if Wikipedia had no infoboxes, since they deter people from actually reading.) Srnec (talk) 05:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I've reverted the re-addition of the mug shot because I think it's inappropriate for it to be added back when the issue is still under vigorous discussion and the majority of the views expressed so far are against keeping it. If we can say a consensus has been reached, then the image shouldn't be added back; if a consensus hasn't been reached, then I suggest it makes sense to follow the current clear majority view until we can reach a consensus. Strawberryjampot (talk) 15:26, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Nobody has responded to my comment on 4 February. Today is the 7th. This is vigorous discussion? The "mug shot" was cropped (by me) so that you cannot know it is a mugshot unless you are told, which you will be only if you click on the image and read its description. I did not add a caption to it. I do not know what is wrong with the image now. A Google image search shows that the cropped image is a good representation of Ezra Pound and how he looked. Srnec (talk) 01:13, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I suggest we keep to the main point, or rather two main points, one of which is procedural, and the other of substance. Procedurally, I think that while working towards a consensus we should follow the majority view, which a review of the comments so far shows is clearly not to have that image as the lead one or only one. As for the substance, that image is pointedly unflattering, looks like a mug shot whatever it's labeled, and in fact is called a mug shot in the mouseover text that appears when you place your cursor on it. For these reasons, I still think it's prejudicial to have that image as the lead or only one. That's my opinion, but if in subsequent discussion it's outweighed by comments by registered users (I don't think we should put much store in anonymous or unsigned comments for obvious reasons) then I won't complain if it's added again. Maybe the best way to proceed would for someone to find a better, usable image and add it to Wikimedia Commons (I don't have the expertise to do this myself) which we can use as the top image, and then we can try to reach a consensus on whether the mug shot is appropriate to include farther down. If anyone can find such a picture to us, I'm sure we'd all be grateful. Strawberryjampot (talk) 15:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I believe I've kept the point. Need I reiterate my desire for a better image? But why should we have no image while we wait? Who said all (or any) images need be flattering? And what is so unflattering about the image cropped? Like I said, I think you blush too easily. The image gives a good impression of how the man looked. Sure, he doesn't look happy, but in few surviving photos does he. And the title of the image can be changed to remove the reference to a mug shot. (And what do you mean by prejudicial? I'm certainly no fascist and have never been arrested, but I was hardly moved to immediately think worse of the man just because he has a mug shot on record!) Srnec (talk) 20:33, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I have no serious objection to the use of the cropped mugshot in the infobox. Hell, I look like that most days myself. Deor (talk) 00:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I think I've had my say on this so will drop out of the discussion for a while and won't tamper further with the image myself. I may check in later to see if others have reached any consensus. Strawberryjampot (talk) 15:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Pavannes and Divisions

The title page of the book published in 1918 can be seen here. That a later publication was titled Pavannes and Divagations is not relevant in the list. Deor (talk) 23:56, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Comic relief

The image of Henri Gaudier-Brzeska's Hieratic Head of Ezra Pound adds a touch of whimsy to the article. It's a nice counter–balance to the grim mugshot. We are grateful to Modern Art for providing some much–needed laughter to this tragic article.Lestrade (talk) 04:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)Lestrade

Main picture redux

I think I've finally been able to establish that the 1913 Coburn photograph of Pound is in the public domain, it having been published before 1923—in Coburn's More Men of Mark (New York: Knopf, 1922). I've updated the image's description page on Commons with the necessary information and PD tag, so there should be no further problem with its deletion. (I've also readded the mugshot image to the article in the appropriate historical section.) Deor (talk) 22:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

These emendations to the image copyright-status and article are well conceived. The Coburn picture of Pound is a significant improvement from the mugshot, which has found its way to a better place in the article now. Really, why wasn't this changed earlier? The Coburn picture was used in the article (as is stated above, and as I remember) several years ago. Mooret2 (talk) 23:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

The image was deleted from Commons for lacking a license. If all the required information is not provided to establish the free status of an image, it's going to be deleted sooner or later. Deor (talk) 23:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Open seminal exchange of work

On the second paragraph it says: "he opened a seminal exchange of work and ideas". What does this mean? How do you open an exchange of work? I can guess what it means, but I was hoping you could improve the writing (I am no expert on Ezra Pound). 217.12.15.52 (talk) 07:30, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

lede

"known as a poet who was attracted to fascism. " was mentioned above, which I think could be more accurately said to be "known as a poet who was a Fascist and anti-Semite, and considered a traitor" but the lede does not even mention fascism or anti-semitism. Pound's marvelous work can be evaluated fairly without such de-emphasis on his life. DGG ( talk ) 11:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

I think it's inescapable that the prominence which should be given to those issues is a matter of judgment. I wouldn't object to them being briefly mentioned in the introduction, something on the lines of, "He was one of the most controversial literary figures of the twentieth century, praised for founding modernism and promoting many important talents, but also condemned for fascism and anti-Semitism and charged with treason." Strawberryjampot (talk) 00:15, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced sections need sourcing

User:Ceoil seems to be of the opinion that the sections Ezra Pound#Pound and music and Ezra Pound#Legacy do not need sources. I think they do. Unless Ceoil has some rationale for how exempting these sections from standard Wikipedia policy will improve the encyclopedia, the sections should be removed or remain tagged until someone can properly source them. Active Banana (talk) 04:01, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Wiki is a work in progerss, that more work needed is obvious and implied, except, obviously to the trigger happy. Hit and run tagers are of value to NOBODY. We are working, come back in two years when were have done further free work to satisfy you high achedimic standards. Ahem: do you really think that we need low value idiot level taggers of your ilk to tell us this? How stupid do you think we are. Ceoil (talk) 04:14, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

I do not think your claim of "obvious" is correct. There is a large, very large in fact, segment of the user base of wikipedia that think that everything they see in wikipedia is true. Hence the use of tags to inform 1) editors of places where they can work to improve the encyclopedia for everyone and 2) alert (or remind) the readers of the fact that wikipedia is a work in progress. If tagging was as you claim of no value, then the community would have determined that it was not at all necessary to have tags and they would have been deleted. Or maybe they are still around because no one has thought to suggest they should all be deleted. You can go test the community sentiment on that proposal if you would like. Active Banana (talk) 04:41, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

And another policy that you seem to have trouble adhering to is no personal attacks. Please stop. Active Banana (talk) 04:51, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Don't treathen me and use the word "please" in the same sentence, please. Passive aggresive is not very nice, actually its just sneaky, snide and low. This is an an article on Ezra Pound, not Bosina or Isreal, you don't need policies like that to protect you here - think of the spirtit for which they were drafted. You are a hit and run tagger, a 2 second critic of others, live with that. And I am quite aware of citation standards. If you had the subtety to notice, I was not attacking you, but your projection of me. Ceoil (talk) 08:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:V and WP:OR the following unsourced sections have been moved to talk as easy reference for editors who wish to use them as a basis for their research. The content can be returned as editors find appropriate sources. Active Banana (talk) 12:40, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

As it happens everything deleted is well established by 20th century American literature scholars. Nonetheless, tomorrow I'll drop everything else I'm doing, and root through my extensive information on 20th century Am. literature and work on this article to add sources. Poor Pound—the least he deserves is a good article on Wikipedia. In the meantime I've restored a bit with a source. As the entire source is the companion to the cantos - well it explains the cantos. Can't get much better than that. Sorry, had this article watchlisted, but somehow missed the kerfuffle. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Workshop

[Pound and music and Legacy sections moved here by Active Banana (talk · contribs) for work on 12:40, 30 May 2010 UTC, referenced and restored to the article by 86.41.64.98 (talk) 14:45, 30 May 2010 (UTC)]

You idiot. You are why apples turn black. Did you spend any seconds researching the work of others that you are deleting. Ceoil (talk) 12:44, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

The quotations in the sections were easy to track down and verify against reliable sources, so I think whoever wrote these sections knew what they were doing and deserve the benefit of the doubt. As such, I have restored these sections – if Active Banana or other editors find particular parts of the sections objectionable, we can discuss those on an individual basis. 86.41.64.98 (talk) 14:45, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Exactly, but somehow I doubt Banana has it to be arguing on an "individual basis". Thank you 86.41.64.98, you are an hero. Ceoil (talk) 16:10, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Longfellow connection

I can't add the reference, as all I have at hand is a mass-market paperback edition with different pagination from the hardback edition, but the Longfellow ancestry is asserted (among other places) in the Stock biography, in the second paragraph of Chapter 1, "Childhood". Deor (talk) 20:30, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Jumped straight to the page 2 - but knew it had to be somewhere. None of the other biographers mention it. I'll add the citation and take out the comment. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I see it's dropped out again. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:39, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

The importance of the family background needs an expansion. Just finished reading another essay and working now to integrate.Truthkeeper88 (talk) 17:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Citation style

Apologize for changing citation styles without gaining consensus. I realize that was perhaps a bit heavy-handed. I'm happy to remove the Harvard templates in favour of no templates, but should do so now before forging forward with the work. Thoughts? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 17:29, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

St. Elizabeths

Sample from a source is here. I don't know why St. Elizabeths is spelled without an apostrophe, but it is. Will add apostrophes for possession if and where appropriate. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Pound and music

Much of the Pound and music section is devoted to his opera Le Testament. How about splitting out the information about the operas into a separate article titled Le Testament and incorportate the background, etc., in that article? A trimmed down section about Pound & music would stay here summarizing the musicality of his poetry, the operas, his work in organizing music festivals and Rapallo, and so on. Thoughts? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Agree; it would be unfair to over give undue weight to one area by virtue of amount of text. A bio on such a substantial and covered figure should follow summary style. Ceoil (talk) 00:28, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

The article currently has 50869 characters and 8403 words of prose (per DYK check tool). Have you considered creating forks for certain sections? Pound is certainly notable enough to warrant several articles...no need to try to smush it all in here.Smallman12q (talk) 02:03, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I get a word count of 8264 8188 which is comparable to Ernest Hemingway at 7967. I think the biography should not be split out, and the style/themes section can't be trimmed much more, but could eventually have a separate, longer article. Currently I'm working on each section in my sandbox to pound them down. Let's give it chance to cook for now. Don't know what others think. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:17, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Missing External Links

I last saw this article about two months ago, and at that time there were several 'external links' which are now missing. I'm particularly thinking of the link that connected to a site which offered the complete text of Jefferson and/or Mussolini. Another link went to a site that had the texts of all, or most, of Pound's WWII broadcasts. And there were still more links which are now missing. Where have these gone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.175.77.5 (talk) 21:43, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

• Below are links I cleaned out about two weeks ago. Don't know whether the one mentioned above are in this list, but none of these seemed to be anything that a quick Google search couldn't unearth. Thus, I cleaned them out.
• Yale College Lecture on Ezra Pound audio, video and full transcripts from Open Yale Courses
• Template:Worldcat id]
• Pound at Modern American Poetry
• Pound at EPC
• Fenollosa, Pound and the Chinese Character
• Template:Worldcat id
• The Music of Ezra Pound
• A Pound biography at Kobe University
• Marjorie Perloff's essay on 'The Pisan Cantos' and Pound's translations
• The Economics of Human Energy in Brooks Adams, Ezra Pound and Robert Theobald

• If anyone disagrees with the decision, then go ahead and replace. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Image comments

As requested, below please find FA criterion three issues:

• File:EzraPound&IsabelPound1898.jpg - Source links directly to the image itself. Where can we verify publication date? (Note creation date of 1898 is not the same as publication.)
• File:Blast2.jpg - License is incorrect. Published works do not have copyright terms based on author lifetime in the US. {{PD-US}} would be appropriate.

  Re-licensed. Эlcobbola _talk 15:51, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

• File:DorothyPound.jpg - License is incorrect (even ignoring that US is 70 years, not 50). This was published before 70 years had past since the author's death (i.e. before 2006). As a published work, copyright term would be based on publication date. Was it published in compliance with US formalities?
• File:Ezra Pound by EO Hoppe, 1920.jpg - UK works are based on life of the author, not publication. When did E.O. Hoppé die? Should be moved to en.wiki if Hoppé has not been dead 70 years.

  Replaced by local file (File:Ezra Pound by EO Hoppe 1920.jpg). Эlcobbola _talk 15:51, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

• File:Ezra Pound passport photograph undated (cropped).jpg - If author is unknown, why is federal government authorship being claimed? Source does not mention federal authorship. (Note that inclusion in a passport does not mean federal authorship. Even now, the passport holder can send their own photos - i.e. photos are not necessarily authored by the government) What is the basis for assuming this photo was authored by a federal agent? Эlcobbola _talk 00:46, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

  File:EzraPound&IsabelPound1898.jpg - Have changed the link and reinstated the Fair Use Rationale. The image is in a biography published in 2007 written by David Moody, published in the United States and England by Oxford University Press.

  As a non-free image, it now needs a detailed and specific rationale per NFCC#10C and WP:FURG. Its purpose is currently "It is considered that this increases the reader's understanding of the subject". How, specifically, it increases that understanding needs to be articulated. e.g. Why is the physical appeaarance of young Pound and his mother significant? What understanding would be lost if the image were omitted? Copyright holder (SUN VALLEY CENTER FOR THE ARTS, per the source) needs to be attributed (NFCC#10A). Эlcobbola _talk 16:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

  File:Blast2.jpg - Updated to {{PD-US}}

  Issue resolved. Эlcobbola _talk 16:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

  File:DorothyPound.jpg is published in a biography written by Noel Stock published by Pantheon Books in 1970 in the United States. If not acceptable, fine to delete.

  Nominated at PUF. Should be removed from the article if the license can't be supported. Эlcobbola _talk 16:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

  Haven't a clue about the passport photo - didn't upload it. The passport seems to have been issued in Italy, probably not an image authored by a federal agent. Delete or add a Fair Use Rationale?

  Fair use images must make a significant contribution to a reader's understanding of the topic (NFCC#8). Does this image make such a contribution? If not, it should be removed. Эlcobbola _talk 16:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

  File:Ezra Pound by EO Hoppe, 1920.jpg Hoppe died in 1972. Don't know how to move to en.wiki.

  Looks like Ceoil took care of it. Эlcobbola _talk 16:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

  How many can I use with Fair Use Rationale? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:45, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

  As per above, the test is whether an image is making a significant contribution to reader understanding. To that end, some articles need/are allowed zero non-free images. Others, however, need/are allowed several non-free images. Ask whether there is something in the article that cannot be understood. If there is no free image available, and the understanding cannot be conveyed by prose, then a non-free image may be appropriate. Эlcobbola _talk 16:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)