Talk:Harold Acton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


How did Harold Acton acquire his title? Was it a knighthood or a baronetcy? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 00:56, 16 November 2006.

"In 1974 he was named a Knight Commander of the British Empire (KBE)." and would have been knighted with that gong. (talk) 10:40, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Acton as Anthony Blanche/Ambrose Silk[edit]

Waugh also wrote that "there is an aesthetic bugger who sometimes turns up in my novels under various names - that was 2/3 Brian [Howard] and 1/3 Harold Acton" (cit. in Patey The Life of Evelyn Waugh Blackwell, 1998). That seems to make the first sentence of the article not entirely accurate, because there is some correlation. (talk) 22:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


Added about the Chicago Mitchells, with refs, apparently very civilised as well as successful, and how HA's parents met. (talk) 10:37, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Todays edits, and call for expertise[edit]

The lede I assembled today was from the article content, and so was by a non-expert (scientist, and American), and was done without checking sources. It therefore needs thoughtful, expert and scholarly attention, from Wikiproject Universty of Oxford, or the other Wikiprojects listed above, for the way in which the different facets of this person's life are covered.

In particular, the lede content needs to be checked against the body, the sourcing of it all needs to be assured, and then the lede needs distillation (with perhaps a bit of augmentation on his work and influence), and the whole of the article needs rewriting, with a view toward reliable sources (i.e., before the article can become GA eligible). As well, specialists in LGBT sources and reporting should review the available sources, and the current way in which this information is presented, for its suitability. FInally, between the references and further reading, every possible manifestation of citation irregularity appears in this article, including rampant bare URLs, every sort of citation presentation, and every imaginable truncation—missing publication authors, dates, titles, page numbers, etc.

In short, the poor quality coverage of the work and life of this subject despite solid available sources, and the fact that recent work (mine), however well-meaning, was done by an inexpert editor—these together call for scholarly attention. Le Prof (talk) 05:36, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Lede was too long[edit]

Though not an Acton expert, I have taken the opportunity of shortening the lede in proportion to the article. Much of it was not ledeworthy.

I don’t think the article should be extended; it seems to me about the right length in relation to the notability of its subject. And it is surely the article, not the lede, that needs the facts checking and the citations correctly inserted. Valetude (talk) 21:59, 19 November 2016 (UTC)