Talk:Mr. Dick

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mr. Dick 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

A fact from Mr. Dick appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 May 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Dickens changed the delusion of Mr. Dick (pictured) from a bull in a china shop to King Charles's head?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mr. Dick.

Novels

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Origins of Mr Dick

Captain Samuel Dick RN was born in Bombay in May 1784 and died at his home Uppermount ( later known as Peacock Vane ) in Bonchurch, Isle of Wight in March 1856 , he was buried however at the family vault in Ashford Kent .

He became friends with Charles Dickens in July 1849 , when Dickens and his family rented “Winterbourne” from the Rev James White ( close friend but also a property developer and author) , this was another substantial property in the small village with 33 substantial dwellings at the time

Dickens is recorded as being entertained by The Dick Family at Uppermount, he wrote 6 chapters of David Copperfield whilst at Winterbourne, and Mr Dick first featured in Chapter 13 , when Dickens first arrived in Bonchurch.

Samuel Dicks daughter , Margaret Dick ( 22 years old in 1849 ) , was jilted at the altar in 1860 , and lead a reclusive life at Madeira Hall . She became the inspiration for “Miss Havisham” from Great Expectations, although Dickens named the character after her immediate neighbour Catherine Haviland. Alan Bonchurch (talk) 03:30, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this information. I shall check it out and, if it stands up, will integrate it into the article. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:07, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 05:40, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

Mr. Dick drawn by Fred Barnard

... that the delusion of Mr. Dick (pictured) went from a bull in a china-shop to King Charles' head?

Reviewed: Fish kick
Comment: I have more plans for expansion but need to get the nomination started during the 5x window. More anon.

5x expanded by Andrew Davidson (talk). Self-nominated at 23:37, 20 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Mr. Dick was not created, promoted to GA, or expanded 5x in the 7 days preceding this March 13 nomination. Given my understanding of the criteria, I don't see a way to move forward with this nomination. Dugan Murphy (talk) 21:23, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dugan Murphy: The article was nominated on the 20th March but was put under the heading for the 13th. You see, the 13th is when the expansion started and WP:DYKNOM states "list the page below under the date the article was created or the expansion began".

Here's an exact calculation using the WP:DYKCHECK tool.

on 13 March 2021: Prose size (text only): 429 characters (75 words) "readable prose size"

on 20 March 2021: Prose size (text only): 3311 characters (543 words) "readable prose size"

So, it went from 429 to 3311 – an expansion of 7.7 times. Ok?

Andrew🐉(talk) 10:20, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrew Davidson: Thank you for making that clear. This is my second DYK review.

Here's my review below.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: My first reaction is that this hook doesn't make sense to someone like me who hasn't read the book, but I guess that's incentive to click on it. ~~All I think is needed are citations for the block quote and the portrayals, unless there's a policy I'm not aware of exempting these cases.~~ Dugan Murphy (talk) 18:25, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dugan Murphy: Thanks for the review. You're already doing well by using the {{DYK checklist}} as it took me much longer to discover that. Regarding your points

I will make another pass through the article to add more citations and ensure that every quotation has one – this is specifically expected by WP:V.
I'm not sure what you mean by "portrayals" but suppose that's the character descriptions so I'll make sure they are cited too

I'm referring here to the section named "Portrayals." Dugan Murphy (talk) 13:09, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The hook is deliberately perplexing to encourage click-through, as you say – it is supposed to be a hook, not a summary of the article. I'm not entirely happy with the wording as it's a bit of a mouthful and so will see if I can make it wittier and/or flow better.

So, I'll ping you again in a day or two to take another look. More anon.

Andrew🐉(talk) 18:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Dugan Murphy (talk) 13:09, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrew Davidson: Any updates on this? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:42, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Like Mr. Dick, I am easily distracted. Thanks for the reminder. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:55, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination is already over a month old, any article issues need to be resolved as soon as possible. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrew Davidson: Please return to the nomination and address the remaining concerns, the nomination may be marked for closure if they are not resolved within a reasonable timeframe. Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 08:55, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My muse has stirred again and so I'm back on it. More anon. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:37, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the edits, this is probably ready for a new review. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 04:17, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the list of portrayals now has citations. I think the only issue now is that the block quote needs a citation. Dugan Murphy (talk) 22:25, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You mean the quote in the Appearance section? That had in text attribution to the relevant chapter of David Copperfield and footnote #6 too. I've repeated footnote #6 but this is overciting IMO, as the quote obviously comes from the novel. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Appearance section is what I was talking about, but I see this is no longer an issue, so I think this review is done. I just updated my review above to reflect that all the issues I identified have been addressed. Dugan Murphy (talk) 03:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dugan Murphy, is this good to go? If so, can you please put the appropriate tick – {{subst:DYKtick}} for on-line hook sources or {{subst:DYKtickAGF}} for an offline hook sources – at the bottom and sign it? Thanks, MeegsC (talk) 20:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The hook is cited with an in-line citation to an online source, which I checked, so I judge that this nomination review is complete and ready to proceed. Dugan Murphy (talk) 20:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]