Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:43, 11 December 2008

If you have any problems, concerns, or just want to comment on my actions and behavior in general, please leave a message here, or if you would like to discuss things, my talk page and email is available for use. A watch page has been created that will list areas that I might have problems with and may need help with. - Ottava Rima

Milton

Finished DYK sets: (26 pages)

• ... that the early poetry of John Milton, including Christ's Nativity, The Passion, Upon the Circumcision, Arcades, L'Allegro, and Il Penseroso, was not published until 1645? (7)

• ... that the religious views of John Milton can be found in his antiprelatical tracts: Of Reformation, Of Prelatical Episcopacy, Animadversions, Reason of Church-Government, and Apology for Smectymnuus? (7)

• ... that the failed marriage of John Milton inspired his divorce tracts: Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce, Judgement of Martin Bucer, Tetrachordon, and Colasterion? (5)

• ... that the political works of John Milton, including Tenure of Kings, Eikonoklastes, Defensio Secunda, Civil Power, and Ready and Easy Way, were controversial but still sold well? (7)

Will update and expand shortly. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Milton Bibliography

• Barker, Arthur. Milton and the Puritan Dilemma 1641-1660. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1942.
• Brisman, Leslie. Milton's Poetry of Choice and Its Romantic Heirs. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1973.
• Evans, Robert. Milton's Elisions. Gainsville: University of Flordia Press, 1966.
• Fichter, Andrew. Poets Historical: Dynastic Epic in the Renaissance. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982.
• Giamatti, A. Barlett. The Earthly Paradise and the Renaissance Epic. New York: W W Norton & Company, 1966.
• Goslee, Nancy. Uriel's Eye. University, Alabama: University of Alabama Press, 1985.
• Gregory, Tobias. From Many Gods to One. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006.
• Ingram, William and Swaim, Kathleen. A Concordance to Milton's English Poetry. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972.
• Lares, Jameela. Milton and the Preaching Arts. Pittsburg: Duquesne University Press, 2001.
• Lawry, Jon. The Shadow of Heaven. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1968.
• McDill, Joseph. Milton and the Pattern of Calvinism. Nashville: The Joint University Libraries, 1942.
• Miller, Leo. John Milton among the Polygamophiles. New York: Loewenthal Press, 1974.
• Quint, David. Epic and Empire. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.
• Revard, Stella. Milton and the Tangles of Neaera's Hair. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1997.
• Shawcross, John. John Milton: The Self and the World. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1993.
• Sherbo, Arthur. English Poetic Diction From Chaucer to Wordsworth. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1975.

• Todd, H. J. Some Account of the Life and Writings of John Milton. London, 1826.
• Stevens, David Harrison. Reference Guide to Milton: From 1800 to the Present Day. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 1930.

• Milton, John. The Complete Poetry and Essential Prose of John Milton. ed. William Kerrigan, John Rumrich, and Stephen Fallon. New York: The Modern Library, 2007.
• Milton, John. A Variorum Commentary on the Poems of John Milton 5 vols

Collections:

• A Companion to Milton. Ed. Thomas Corns. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2003.
• Lewalski, Barbara. "Genre"
• Hale, John. "The Classical Literary Tradition"
• Schwartz, Regina. "Milton on the Bible"
• Parry, Graham. "Literary Baroque and Literary Neoclassicism"
• Guibbory, Achsah. "Milton and English Poetry"
• Corns, Thomas. "Milton's English"
• Brown, Cedric. "The Legacy of the Late Hacobean Period"
• Keeble, N. H. "Milton and Puritanism"
• Rumrich, John. "Radical Heterodoxy and Heresy"
• McColley, Diane. "Milton and Ecology"
• Hadfield, Andrew. "The English and Other People"
• Raymond, Joad. "The Literature of Controversy"
• Corns, Thomas. "'On the Morning of Christ's Nativity', 'Upon the Circumcision' and 'The Passion'"
• Comus, Lycidas (unnecessary)
• Wheeler, Elizabeth. "Early Political Prose"
• Patterson, Annabel. "Milton, Marriage and Divorce"
• Dzelzainis, Martin. "Republicanism"
• Knoppers, Laura. "Late Political Prose"
• Fallon, Stephen. "Paradise Lost in Intellectual History"
• Loewenstein, David. "The Radical Religious Politics of Paradise Lost"
• other stuff on PL unnecessary
• Leonard, John. "Self-Contradicting Puns in Paradise Lost"
• Achinstein, Sharon. "Samson Agonistes"
• Kean, Margaret. "Paradise Regained"
• Stevenson, Kay Gilliland. "Reading Milton, 1674-1800"
• Kitson, Peter. "Milton: The Romantics and After"
• Campbell, Gordon. "The Life Records"

• The Cambridge Companion to Milton. Ed. Dennis Danielson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
• Dobranski, Stephen. "Milton's social life"
• Comus and Lycidas (unnecessary)
• Burrow, Colin. "Poems 1645: the future poet"
• Dzelzainis, Martin. "Milton's politics"
• Corns, Thomas. "Milton's prose"
• Hall, R. F. "Milton's sonnests and his contemporaries"
• PL (unnecessary)
• Danielson, Dennis. "The Fall and Milton's theodicy"
• Carey, John. "Milton's Satan"
• McColley, Diane. "Milton and the sexes"
• Christopher, Georgia. "Milton and the reforming spirit"
• Radzinowicz, Mary Ann. "How Milton read the bible: the case ofParadise Regained
• Bennet, Joan. "Reading samson Agonistes"
• Von Maltzahn, Nicholas. "Milton's readers"
• Kerrigan, William. "Milton's place in intellectual history"
• Seimens, R. G. "Milton's work and life: selected studies and resources"

Please move your conversation off Awadewit's talk page

User:Awadewit just got out of the hospital - the last thing she needs is to have all these messages between you and User:Politizer on DYK that have nothing to do with her on her talk page. Please move your conversation elsewhere for her sake, thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>° 18:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

No where to move it to. Awadewit was part of the Milton thing. Politizer felt the need to respond. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I see Politizer has removed the messages in question. I was unclear in my message above - I orginally meant to please continue the discussion elsewhere (i.e. one of your talk pages or the DYK talk page). Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>° 19:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

And Politizer has gone against Talk Page guidelines in doing so. Only Awadewit has the right to remove comments wholesale from her talk page, and only the individual person who posted the message to begin with has the right to remove theirs. This lack of decorum and procedure is troubling to say the least. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I removed the conversation because that is what I understood Ruhrfisch's request to be. If Ruhrfisch only meant that I should continue the conversation elsewhere and leave the previous conversation untouched, then my action was the result of a miscommunication, not a malicious lack of decorum. (And I find it funny that you have in the past accused me of being a newbie and not knowing anything about anything, whereas now you're accusing me of purposely going against Talk Page guidelines...apparently you think I read up on WP guidelines really quickly just so that I could maliciously flaunt them?) I was removing the conversation because the user in question is having medical problems and may not, as Ruhrfisch suggested, have the time or energy to deal with it herself; if you have a problem with my actions there, you are always welcome to put the conversation back.

If you still have problems with my editing, please stop pussy-footing around and just open up an RfC on me right now. I'm not kidding. I'm tired of your bullshit, and if you want to pursue this then take it to RfC. —Politizer /_contribs 20:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I was not clear in my original request and what I said could be interpreted either way. Sorry. Idid not mean to open a new can of worms - I have no problem with the removal of the dispute from Awadewit's talk page. Politizer's edit summary made clear what was being removed and why. Since this is a Wiki and anyone who wants to can look at the diff or old version, the information is not really lost, just removed for now. My goal on all of this was to make life easier for Awadewit. I also hope that your dispute with each other can end. I am signing off on this now, if you need me please ask on my talk page. Ruhrfisch _><>° 20:35, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Tom Weisner DYK

As I understand it, you only need one person who feels a hook is DYK worthy. Why don't you move it to the next page? Only the nominator is ineligible to perform such an action.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:12, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Because only Admin are supposed to be doing such. Admin select what goes on the main page. I am not an admin on this Wiki, only on others. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Cool it

Ottava, maybe take a break and give others a chance, eh. You are one of the few people getting angry and picking a fight on Cas's talk in a long while. Does that tell you anything. "I've only been gone from DYK for two weeks and it seems like everything went backwards". Do you really expect anybody to take such a statement seriously? Do you really hold everybody else in such low regard. C'mon. Ceoil (talk) 01:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Do you want me to forward you emails of those who messaged me to tell me that they feel the same exact way and feel that people are trying to push things that are just not right? I don't say things lightly. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sure, you don't say things lightly, except that you're going to have a topic ban of me from DYK. What ever happened to that? Did you forget? If you still want to do it, I'm here waiting.

Next time you decide to threaten me, actually go through with it. Otherwise, quit wasting my time. —Politizer /_contribs 04:09, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you are trying to taunt me over the fact that I have other things to deal with before getting you removed from DYK over your constant actions that have bothered a lot of people? And you think that is not being incivil? You sure have a strange perception about what is acceptable or not. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:28, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Ottava, I am sorry to see that you are not taking well-meaning advice. I've noticed lately that you've reverted to the pattern that has gotten you taken to ANI in the past and almost banned. I am assuming from this and your disregard for the recent times that Ceoil and I have tried to caution you that you no longer consider yourself under mentorship. I think you are an excellent content contributor, and I sincerely hope you stop listening to whatever advice you appear to be getting from email; I am afraid that if you continue the tendentiousness (and at times, incivility) from the past few days that you may end up back at ANI, and I doubt things will go as well this time. Good luck. Karanacs (talk) 20:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Luan Da's FAC

Hi, I think you are opposing because you believe that the article still lacks details about the life of Luan, and that is due to its lack of sources (i.e. the current sources do not cover these aspects). To better explain my comments to your view, could you take a look at User talk:Nousernamesleft/archive7#Additional resources for Luan Da, which contains my cursory translations of Zhang and Xuhui for his perusal for the article. Hopefully, that can help make it clearer why I state that other sources have nothing new that Zhang, Xuhui, and Watson (translation of Record of the Grand Historian) could not provide. Furthermore, if you feel that something is substantially lacking from the article on Luan, perhaps these translations can help to pinpoint what they are, so that they can be raised for Nousernames left to act on. Jappalang (talk) 01:57, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

No. As I made it clear, I am opposing it for the same reason as I opposed it last time. I don't believe it is long enough to be an FA. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah... okay. Could you clarify that on the FAC? A copy and paste of your response above would help to clarify that your oppose is based on the length of the article (a brief article that might suggest a less-than-comprehensive article), rather than a lack of sources. Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 05:02, 11 December 2008 (UTC)