Talk:Becoming Jane

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Becoming Jane 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

Becoming Jane has been listed as one of the Media and drama 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
August 4, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

Ireland Mid‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland 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.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Romance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romance, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional romance in literature and romantic fiction writers. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.RomanceWikipedia:WikiProject RomanceTemplate:WikiProject Romanceromance articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Film: British / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Neutrality

For God's sake, it's as though this article's been written entirely by the studio who distributed it! It's not neutral in the slightest, filled with weasel words such as using "gorgeous" to describe the costumes used in the film. It needs a rewrite. Crazy Eddy 16:04, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"It needs a rewrite". For God's sake, don't just stand on the sidelines and shout it! Get in there and do it! Be bold! -- Jmc 21:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken out some of the more egregious adjectives, but it still needs a lot of work. In my opinion, the article has too many passages from the film; for example, is "Joe Anderson was an attractive Henry Austen and as an Oxford militia officer, he had the opportunity to wear a beautiful scarlet uniform, which invited a particular comment from Eliza de Feullide (‘Scarlet looks good in you’). He also wore a brown overcoat during his walk with Jane and Eliza." (in the Costumes section) necessary? ANyone have any thoughts? CaptainJae 20:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Austen women in cricket.jpg

Image:Austen women in cricket.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:52, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Hathaway with book.jpg

Image:Hathaway with book.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:05, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Normal janehq15.jpg

Image:Normal janehq15.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 00:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

I'm wondering if there aren't too many pictures in this article? Nine, that I counted. All very nice, yes, but I wonder if all are needed to illustrate this movie? Elbeonore 05:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still a stub

Sorry people, but this page is still technically a stub until it has a plot synopsis of some kind. Since this page is already quite long, it might be worthwhile cutting down some of the more superfluous stuff (such as the very long "Dances", "Costumes", and "Trivia" sections), or at least moving them to a separate sub-page. -- Grandpafootsoldier 20:36, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm for moving them to a sub-page, as I find this sort of information very interesting and one of the reasons I come to wiki in the first place.

BellyOption (talk) 11:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Off Topic Tag

On reading the article, the leading sentence in the dance section caught my eye: "It is a truth universally acknowledged among Jane Austen fans that Jane Austen loved to dance." I'm not entirely sure we need cute references to book quotations in an encyclopedia article, but I was going to let it slide. Then I read the rest of the section - though well-intended and well-written, it both reads like an essay (though I omitted that tag in favor of the off-topic one) and has very little to do with the film. Instead it turns into an very extended digression on dance in the Austen era. I'd like to see an editor more familiar with Austen and the film work it into something better, but if nothing happens in a few days I'll try to cut it into something on-topic. Vonspringer 16:46, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This material is nearly a verbatum transcript of a blog entry http://becomingjane.blogspot.com/2007/06/dances-in-becoming-jane.html

BellyOption 19:26, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Templates Added

Hi all, I'v added two templates as the article is not organized properly, in need of much referencing, rather POV, and there is no seperate synopsis (plot summary). Also, I call into question the costuming sections, they should be pared down into one section if thry are deemed completely necesary. There was mention that parts of this article are copy/pasted from other websites; if so please delete all said violations. Thank you. Zidel333 15:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Section Added

I think this article is missing some specific information about how Jane Austen's life has inspired her books, which is one of the main reasons that this film was made and why this film was so interesting. It would be comprehensive to capture some of the (more direct) references the film made to the novels. I think this could be another subsection by itself. Please feel free to edit/add more references! --Chacciaz 15:14, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, most of this film is FICTIONALIZED. There is no evidence to support the idea that events from jane Austen's supposed love life directly inspired the plots of her novels. The references the film makes to Austen's novels (through made up events from Austen's life) should be taken with a large grain of salt, along the vein of Shakespeare in Love. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.237.255 (talk) 22:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Wisley is Anne de Burgh?

Really? Really? I'm removing the whole section - if somebody can source it, they can restore it, of course. john k (talk) 03:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Live by her pen

The article says that it was ironic that she did not live by her pen, publishing anonomously. But the main Jane Austin page disagrees. And indeed one could pubish anonomously and still get proceeds from the writing, which it appears she did. It is true that she got much more popular and widely read after her death, but it appears she was comfortable with the proceeds of her writing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigmac31 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Becoming Jane/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Grapple X (talk · contribs) 01:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Anne Hathaway. Annehathawayannehathawayannehathawayannehathawayannehathawayannehathaway....

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
In the infobox, stick a space between "112 min." and the opening bracket after it.
In the lead, I would take "together" out of that second quote and just include it before the quotation mark; I think the flow of quotes can be a bit odd when they begin halfway through an aphorism like that.
" it had better preserved locations than Hampshire" -> unless you mean that its preserved locations were better than the preserved locations in Hampshire (both were preserved, the Irish ones maybe had better accessibility/affordability/tea?), then hyphenate "better-preserved" to indicate that the locations were in preserved in better condition.
"Hathaway received mixed critical reception" -> I'd phrase this to focus on her performance, as I'm sure they didn't think she was a terrible person.
"peers of that era" -> His contemporaries in the field, or those with peerages?
"The actress called her character "terribly sensible [who] gets her heart broken..." -> I think this needs a bit of reworking, as is it seems like a fragment. Perhaps "The actress called her character "terribly sensible", noting that she "gets her heart broken..."; then continuing on.
"Mhaoldhomhnaigh attended the Cannes Film Festival in May 2006" -> "Ní" is actually part of her surname too, it's the feminine form of "O'" (like in "O'Shaughnessy").
The link in "empire waistline" is a redirect; although it's not technically wrong to include them I can't see this particular one being spun out from the target article at any point so perhaps a pipe ([[empire silhouette|empire waistline]]) would be better here.
"€12.7 million (£9 million or 6.5 million)" -> I'm not sure what the "or 6.5 million" here means, is it missing a currency sign or is this meant to be an approximate range (6.5 to 9 mil)?
Spell out ADR when you mention it. It's a jargony term that cinéastes will know but not necessarily anyone else.
"It ultimately grossed £3.78 million in the UK and Ireland, placing in sixteenth among all UK films in those markets." -> On what time scale? 16th ever, year-end, that week?
" It earned the highest grosses in the US, the UK, and Australia." -> "its highest grosses"; as is the sentence reads like it was the top-grossing film in those countries.
"Critics lauded Hathaway and McAvoy for the chemistry between their characters, lending authenticity to the love story between Austen and Lefroy." -> this implies the critical praise gave the love story authenticity, perhaps change "lending" to "finding that it lent".
Does the blu-ray contain the listed extras too?
Not directly related but I've got to the bottom of the article and noticed it—you might want to add an image for the Austen portal by creating a subpage of Template:Portal/Images (Template:Portal/Images/Jane Austen).

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Fine.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Fine, but ref 24 is missing a space before the subscription template.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Grand.
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Grand.
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Grand.
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Wondering how useful File:Austen women in cricket.jpg is. Here, for example, is a CC2.0 image of Hathaway's dress; the lack of variety I see being compensated for by the increased resolution a free file offers. Other than that the images are fine.
Nice find! I have no problem with uploading that image. Before I do so, is {{tl|cc-by-2.0}} what you meant, or should I use a different license? I've never uploaded something like this particular image before and don't want to mess it up somehow. Thanks, Ruby 2010/2013 02:33, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's the one indeed. Just remember to give due credit to the creator when it's uploaded. GRAPPLE X 02:37, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
In good shape already, just a few tweaks to be made. I don't know why I keep reviewing these. Work on something with more blood and guts please. :P GRAPPLE X 01:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reading of your despair of anything Austen always brings a smile to my face. Sorry, not a blood and guts kind of girl, though I am fond of anything Tarantino... I'll start working on the article shortly. Ruby 2010/2013 02:33, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All done! Let me know if there are any outstanding issues with the image I uploaded to commons. Thanks again for reviewing an article that I know was difficult for you. ;) Ruby 2010/2013 03:25, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy days, passed. This one wasn't that hard, Anne Hathaway helps things. But just remember, I bombed the same Romanticism course twice at uni. Then why'd you take it twice, Grapple? Shut up, Grapple. GRAPPLE X 03:36, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Music

No wikipandit seems to have noticed that "Bond Street Airs" is from Mendelssohn "Schweizerlied" (String Symphony No. 11 in F major, part 2) --Tilman (talk) 15:07, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Becoming Jane. 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/20110730135137/http://blog.hanwayfilms.com:80/film/catalogue/hanway-films-collection/becomin-jane/ to http://blog.hanwayfilms.com/film/catalogue/hanway-films-collection/becomin-jane/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 17:08, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Becoming Jane. 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/20100531070941/http://www.goldentrailer.com/awards.gta9.php to http://www.goldentrailer.com/awards.gta9.php

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 05:06, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Becoming Jane. 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/20090415204008/http://thecelebritycafe.com/cd/full_review/12965.html to http://thecelebritycafe.com/cd/full_review/12965.html

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 20:54, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Becoming Jane. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 22:58, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]