| Revision as of 01:16, 24 June 2007 editGeogre (talk | contribs)25,257 editsm →[]: will well← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:14, 25 June 2007 edit undoMarskell (talk | contribs)22,422 edits →[]: supNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| *'''Comment''': I am not a FA reviewer but I can comment but there are some short FA's including ], sometimes it's not about the lenghth of an article but the ''comprehensive'' of it. The FA criteria says "Comprehensive" means that the article does not neglect major facts and details." and "It is of appropriate length, staying focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail". So article lenghth is always based on the what the article is. <span style="background-color: maroon; color: white"><small>''']''' ''']'''</small></span> 04:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC) | *'''Comment''': I am not a FA reviewer but I can comment but there are some short FA's including ], sometimes it's not about the lenghth of an article but the ''comprehensive'' of it. The FA criteria says "Comprehensive" means that the article does not neglect major facts and details." and "It is of appropriate length, staying focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail". So article lenghth is always based on the what the article is. <span style="background-color: maroon; color: white"><small>''']''' ''']'''</small></span> 04:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Support''': I have done small, small amounts here and there with the article. Bawds and bawdy houses are an increasingly important subject in 18th century literary and historical studies, both with New Historicists and various "identity" studies, as well as, of course, historical feminism. Gathering up the sum of what is known on this figure is difficult. Short of having access to an excellent rare book room, the nominator has gathered up all that was possible. As a primary researcher, I know that more was said and written about her, but absolutely none of that is in print or accessible to a researcher not lucky enough to be at the Bodleian and blessed with oceans of vast eternity to do the digging. As an FA, this may well fire the imaginations of serious researchers and provide in one nice, compact form all that we presently know of the lady. ] 20:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC) | *'''Support''': I have done small, small amounts here and there with the article. Bawds and bawdy houses are an increasingly important subject in 18th century literary and historical studies, both with New Historicists and various "identity" studies, as well as, of course, historical feminism. Gathering up the sum of what is known on this figure is difficult. Short of having access to an excellent rare book room, the nominator has gathered up all that was possible. As a primary researcher, I know that more was said and written about her, but absolutely none of that is in print or accessible to a researcher not lucky enough to be at the Bodleian and blessed with oceans of vast eternity to do the digging. As an FA, this may well fire the imaginations of serious researchers and provide in one nice, compact form all that we presently know of the lady. ] 20:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *<s>'''Oppose,''' not enough footnotes.</s> Erk, wrong speech. More good work Yomangani. Any estimates on her birth year? And after the 1724 arrest, she got back to work immediately, or is there no info on that (it jumps to '28 suddenly)? Otherwise, I think this as comprehensive as can be expected, if this all the material that's available. It's 9k prose, incidentally, which isn't quite our shortest; I still think we need some process of encouraging these without necessarily a full FAC, if GA is not to do it. '''Support'''. ] 12:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:14, 25 June 2007
Elizabeth Needham
The most exclusive London brothel-keeper of her day. Little is known about her, but everything that is known is here. Short FAs are a sadly under-represented category, so I hope this can start to redress the balance. Yomangani 00:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: I am not a FA reviewer but I can comment but there are some short FA's including Cape Feare, sometimes it's not about the lenghth of an article but the comprehensive of it. The FA criteria says "Comprehensive" means that the article does not neglect major facts and details." and "It is of appropriate length, staying focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail". So article lenghth is always based on the what the article is. SpecialWindler talk 04:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Support: I have done small, small amounts here and there with the article. Bawds and bawdy houses are an increasingly important subject in 18th century literary and historical studies, both with New Historicists and various "identity" studies, as well as, of course, historical feminism. Gathering up the sum of what is known on this figure is difficult. Short of having access to an excellent rare book room, the nominator has gathered up all that was possible. As a primary researcher, I know that more was said and written about her, but absolutely none of that is in print or accessible to a researcher not lucky enough to be at the Bodleian and blessed with oceans of vast eternity to do the digging. As an FA, this may well fire the imaginations of serious researchers and provide in one nice, compact form all that we presently know of the lady. Geogre 20:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Oppose, not enough footnotes.Erk, wrong speech. More good work Yomangani. Any estimates on her birth year? And after the 1724 arrest, she got back to work immediately, or is there no info on that (it jumps to '28 suddenly)? Otherwise, I think this as comprehensive as can be expected, if this all the material that's available. It's 9k prose, incidentally, which isn't quite our shortest; I still think we need some process of encouraging these without necessarily a full FAC, if GA is not to do it. Support. Marskell 12:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)