Talk:Madeleine L'Engle: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:17, 7 April 2006

"It is sometimes ambiguous whether Meg ... has also acquired her Ph.D."

Odd statement. Are there other times when it's unambiguously stated one way or the other? --wwoods 06:47, 10 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure L'Engle has it each way at least once, and I don't think it was clearly just a case of before she didn't, now she does. But the sentence does look weird, and I'm not averse to removing or replacing it. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 20:12, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I switched out the picture on this page. The one that was previously here wasn't tagged, and may be deleted. I went and found a publicity picture used on her page at WaterBrook Press. If the first picture doesn't get deleted, it's the better one, and should probably be incorporated into the article. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 06:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"The questions that she raises engage the thoughtful reader." What exactly does that mean? Oswald Glinkmeyer 00:08, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, whatever it means, it's original research, unless that sentence and the sentence before it are rephrased as "Though her work all addresses issues of faith, critics and reviewers have noted that her work is more about raising questions of belief and faith than about promoting dogma. Citation". I'll delete it, and someone can restore it if they feel like finding a supporting source. Deborah-jl _Talk 00:28, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My initial impression is that the sentence is what used to be called a "throwaway sentence." In this case a sentence that can generally be said about most decent writing. Without making a connection either to some outside source or being better woven into the thread, it doesn't really have much meaning and does not add to the information in the article. Sort of like saying in a Shakespeare entry, "His plays are interesting for those who watch them." That may be true, but what does it add to the article? Not much. Deletion is the best route until it can be re-thought. Oswald Glinkmeyer 02:57, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

biography source

That's some good bio information that's been added. Is there a reference we can cite for it? Deborah-jl _Talk 13:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 :Well, whatever it means, it's [[WP:NOT|original research]], unless that sentence and the sentence before it are rephrased as "Though her work all addresses issues of faith, critics and reviewers have noted that her work is more about raising questions of belief and faith than about promoting dogma. ''Citation''".  I'll delete it, and someone can restore it if they feel like finding a supporting source. [[User:Deborah-jl|Deborah-jl]] <sub>[[User talk:Deborah-jl|Talk]]</sub> 00:28, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 ::My initial impression is that the sentence is what used to be called a "throwaway sentence." In this case a sentence that can generally be said about most decent writing.  Without making a connection either to some outside source or being better woven into the thread, it doesn't really have much meaning and does not add to the information in the article.  Sort of like saying in a Shakespeare entry, "His plays are interesting for those who watch them."  That may be true, but what does it add to the article?  Not much.  Deletion is the best route until it can be re-thought. [[User:Oswald Glinkmeyer|Oswald Glinkmeyer]] 02:57, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
+==biography source==
+That's some good bio information that's been added.  Is there a reference we can cite for it? [[User:Deborah-jl|Deborah-jl]] <sub>[[User talk:Deborah-jl|Talk]]</sub> 13:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)