This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Harriet Jacobs article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on March 7, 2020, March 7, 2022, and March 7, 2023. |
The result of the move request was: Moved Old history which was formerly at Harriet Jacobs can now be found at Harriet Ann Jacobs ( closed by non-admin page mover) Wug· a·po·des 03:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Harriet Ann Jacobs →
Harriet Jacobs – The middle name "Ann" is dubious. Her biographer and editor Jean Fagan Yellin consistently calls her "Harriet Jacobs". Not a single of the many documents cited in Yellin's Harriet Jacobs. A Life. has a middle name "Ann". Also the inscription on the tombstone simply reads "Harriet Jacobs".
Rsk6400 (
talk) 20:37, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
She is often called "Harriet Ann Jacobs" (see the first footnote in the article), but I don't know where the middle name comes from. Yellin used "Harriet Ann" in 2000, but by 2004 she had changed to "Harriet", without giving an explanation. I am under the impression that the middle name was invented long after Jacobs's death, but by whom ? Can anybody help me ? -- Rsk6400 ( talk) 20:24, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
I spent some time re-writing the article, mostly based on Yellin's biography and Yellin's edition which seem to be the most extensive works on Jacobs. Now I hope the article is no longer C-class, and would be happy, if some other users agreed to call it "B". -- Rsk6400 ( talk) 06:44, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Sarahadkins001:, sorry again for reverting most of your recent changes. Let me explain my reasons: You took the story surrounding the cottage from the summary at docsouth. Comparing that source to Yellin's biography, I'm very confident that Yellin's biography is much more reliable (see WP:RS).
Jacobs definitely was no advocate. And "former enslaved woman" doesn't match the category "occupation".
I changed the order of the last two paragraphs, because I think Yellin's statement should remain at the end as the conclusion of the section. Rsk6400 ( talk) 06:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
I also removed the paragraph on the impact on recent discussions. The source you gave was written by a student who in part relied on earlier versions of this very article. Rsk6400 ( talk) 07:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Was lucky enough to find a scan of an original carte-de-visite of her. I think, given it's the only known formal photograph, it would be wise to keep the mount as part of its presentation - though we can always use {{ CSS image crop}} in the article to crop out the mount in the article. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 03:21, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
@ Indy beetle: The question whether to call a person "American" or "African-American" is a sensitive issue. If it were not, we wouldn't have this discussion. Anyway, using an edit summary is considered normal and polite. Her being "African-American" was very important for her life and for her book. In 1864, she said in a speech that before the Emancipation Proclamation the American flag meant nothing to "us" (i.e. the black people). Her only book was published in 1861, so in the light of that speech we can assume that the US flag at that time meant nothing to her. In her native North Carolina, not even male African-Americans were full citizens (i.e. able to vote) at the time of her death. One anthology containing part of her work is called "Anthology of African-American woman writers". -- Rsk6400 ( talk) 07:34, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
We define people by nationality, not ethnicity.The article and the lede have to reflect the individual life of the person described. In Jacobs's case her being African-American is surely one of the most important pieces of information that the reader of the article needs to get a basic understanding of her (and that's definitely not the case with Kennedy).
@
Drmies: In your edit summary a few days ago, you said
Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Layout. there are problems here--the abundance of citations to Yellin, Harriet Jacobs, when the book is cited in the "Further reading". These many citations should be abbreviated and the book listed in a bibliography section.
- Regarding citations, I only found Editors may use any citation method they choose.
Are there other problems you see, apart from the citation problem ? --
Rsk6400 (
talk) 08:24, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
Regarding your addition stating that her freedom, in a free state, had to be bought
: I now understand why you think it important and totally agree with you. Still, I changed the order of the statements to match the order of events, changed "a benefactor" to "Mrs. Willis" because her husband is mentioned and also because I don't know whether she really acted as a benefactor or if she was fulfilling the promise she had given to John S. when she convinced Jacobs to accept the position. How shall we call Norcom's daughter ? I feel that "legal owner" has the advantage of reminding the reader of the barbaric nature of the laws of that time. But I'm open to other solutions and I also have some doubts whether N.P.Willis was important enough in her life to be mentioned in the lede. --
Rsk6400 (
talk) 11:55, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
Just shortened some references, will do more in the next days. I'm aiming at MLA-style, because I've been hating author-year short footnotes for more than 30 years now. -- Rsk6400 ( talk) 14:50, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
Frustrating discussions with a user who has been blocked indefinitely shortly afterwards
|
---|
There's too much of an effort in this article to include every detail of the Harriet Jacobs's saga perfectly, and instead the story becomes quite confusing. I would suggest simplifying the whole thing. Summarize rather than trying to include every twist and turn in the story. Also, the he/she references are often unclear but that is partly a factor of trying to say too much. Tbobbed ( talk) 19:05, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
@
Tbobbed: Why did you remove that her book is called a "classic" ? The lede should summarize the most important points of the article, including those that establish her notability. On the other hand, I don't see a reason to include her early literacy. The age at which a future writer became literate is not normally included in the lede of their article. The use of "enslaver" in the sense of "master" may be a new development in the English language, but it is much simpler than
|
The timeline at the end of this article is... quite nonstandard. I'm not sure if it is appropriate to include. Further, I would note that the listings are mostly based on a single source, footnoted only once, and open to potential accusations of copyvio. Additionally, because it is not footnoted line by line, there is a strong chance that well-meaning editors would add information not provided in that source and, therefore, the integrity of that footnote and the entire section is compromised. Unless someone can provide samples of recognized quality biography articles with a similar timeline, I would propose removing it entirely. -- Midnightdreary ( talk) 17:04, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
The Supreme Court refuses to grant freedom to Dred Scott, a slave living on free soil in Missouri Territory, our article has
Supreme Court ruling on Dred Scott: Blacks had "no rights which the white man was bound to respect". As in other timelines, verifiability is provided by links to the respective articles. Since the source contains some errors (cf. the statement on Dred Scott), I'd also be reluctant to have an external link to it. BTW: The source doesn't mention The Raven - horrible fault ;-)
Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Gilbert Studios photograph of Harriet Jacobs.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for March 7, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-03-07. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 7.9% of all FPs 11:58, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
La Wally is an opera in four acts by composer Alfredo Catalani, to a libretto by Luigi Illica, first performed at La Scala, Milan, in 1892. The story is set in the Austrian Tyrol where the heroine Wally is in love with Giuseppe Hagenbach. However, her father, Stromminger, wants her to marry Vincenzo Gellner. The opera concludes with Hagenbach and Wally pledging their love for each other, but being killed by an avalanche. La Wally was Catalani's last opera. This 1892 illustration by Adolfo Hohenstein depicts the Act I costume design for the title character Wally. Painting credit: Adolfo Hohenstein; restored by Adam Cuerden
Recently featured:
|
I think there are too many extraneous and tangential images cluttering this article. Agree or disagree? --Animalparty! ( talk) 23:40, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
This sounds to me as if the Horniblows had been the ones who originally made her a slave. I presume that she had been born a slave and that the people who originally made her ancestors slaves (had 'enslaved' them) were some West African chieftains and/or European slave-traders. The Horniblows were just her owners at the moment. Maybe this wording is meant to be a way to make their ownership of a slave sound more violent and thus more blameworthy or something? In any case, it seems to blur the distinction between different meanings and different factual claims. 87.126.21.225 ( talk) 20:23, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
"...the distance as the crow flies between the two houses was only 600 feet (180 m)." Any reason why this sentence uses a WP:IDIOM? Why not just say the distance between the two houses was only 600 feet? Muzilon ( talk) 08:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Harriet Jacobs article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on March 7, 2020, March 7, 2022, and March 7, 2023. |
The result of the move request was: Moved Old history which was formerly at Harriet Jacobs can now be found at Harriet Ann Jacobs ( closed by non-admin page mover) Wug· a·po·des 03:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Harriet Ann Jacobs →
Harriet Jacobs – The middle name "Ann" is dubious. Her biographer and editor Jean Fagan Yellin consistently calls her "Harriet Jacobs". Not a single of the many documents cited in Yellin's Harriet Jacobs. A Life. has a middle name "Ann". Also the inscription on the tombstone simply reads "Harriet Jacobs".
Rsk6400 (
talk) 20:37, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
She is often called "Harriet Ann Jacobs" (see the first footnote in the article), but I don't know where the middle name comes from. Yellin used "Harriet Ann" in 2000, but by 2004 she had changed to "Harriet", without giving an explanation. I am under the impression that the middle name was invented long after Jacobs's death, but by whom ? Can anybody help me ? -- Rsk6400 ( talk) 20:24, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
I spent some time re-writing the article, mostly based on Yellin's biography and Yellin's edition which seem to be the most extensive works on Jacobs. Now I hope the article is no longer C-class, and would be happy, if some other users agreed to call it "B". -- Rsk6400 ( talk) 06:44, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Sarahadkins001:, sorry again for reverting most of your recent changes. Let me explain my reasons: You took the story surrounding the cottage from the summary at docsouth. Comparing that source to Yellin's biography, I'm very confident that Yellin's biography is much more reliable (see WP:RS).
Jacobs definitely was no advocate. And "former enslaved woman" doesn't match the category "occupation".
I changed the order of the last two paragraphs, because I think Yellin's statement should remain at the end as the conclusion of the section. Rsk6400 ( talk) 06:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
I also removed the paragraph on the impact on recent discussions. The source you gave was written by a student who in part relied on earlier versions of this very article. Rsk6400 ( talk) 07:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Was lucky enough to find a scan of an original carte-de-visite of her. I think, given it's the only known formal photograph, it would be wise to keep the mount as part of its presentation - though we can always use {{ CSS image crop}} in the article to crop out the mount in the article. Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 7.3% of all FPs 03:21, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
@ Indy beetle: The question whether to call a person "American" or "African-American" is a sensitive issue. If it were not, we wouldn't have this discussion. Anyway, using an edit summary is considered normal and polite. Her being "African-American" was very important for her life and for her book. In 1864, she said in a speech that before the Emancipation Proclamation the American flag meant nothing to "us" (i.e. the black people). Her only book was published in 1861, so in the light of that speech we can assume that the US flag at that time meant nothing to her. In her native North Carolina, not even male African-Americans were full citizens (i.e. able to vote) at the time of her death. One anthology containing part of her work is called "Anthology of African-American woman writers". -- Rsk6400 ( talk) 07:34, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
We define people by nationality, not ethnicity.The article and the lede have to reflect the individual life of the person described. In Jacobs's case her being African-American is surely one of the most important pieces of information that the reader of the article needs to get a basic understanding of her (and that's definitely not the case with Kennedy).
@
Drmies: In your edit summary a few days ago, you said
Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Layout. there are problems here--the abundance of citations to Yellin, Harriet Jacobs, when the book is cited in the "Further reading". These many citations should be abbreviated and the book listed in a bibliography section.
- Regarding citations, I only found Editors may use any citation method they choose.
Are there other problems you see, apart from the citation problem ? --
Rsk6400 (
talk) 08:24, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
Regarding your addition stating that her freedom, in a free state, had to be bought
: I now understand why you think it important and totally agree with you. Still, I changed the order of the statements to match the order of events, changed "a benefactor" to "Mrs. Willis" because her husband is mentioned and also because I don't know whether she really acted as a benefactor or if she was fulfilling the promise she had given to John S. when she convinced Jacobs to accept the position. How shall we call Norcom's daughter ? I feel that "legal owner" has the advantage of reminding the reader of the barbaric nature of the laws of that time. But I'm open to other solutions and I also have some doubts whether N.P.Willis was important enough in her life to be mentioned in the lede. --
Rsk6400 (
talk) 11:55, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
Just shortened some references, will do more in the next days. I'm aiming at MLA-style, because I've been hating author-year short footnotes for more than 30 years now. -- Rsk6400 ( talk) 14:50, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
Frustrating discussions with a user who has been blocked indefinitely shortly afterwards
|
---|
There's too much of an effort in this article to include every detail of the Harriet Jacobs's saga perfectly, and instead the story becomes quite confusing. I would suggest simplifying the whole thing. Summarize rather than trying to include every twist and turn in the story. Also, the he/she references are often unclear but that is partly a factor of trying to say too much. Tbobbed ( talk) 19:05, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
@
Tbobbed: Why did you remove that her book is called a "classic" ? The lede should summarize the most important points of the article, including those that establish her notability. On the other hand, I don't see a reason to include her early literacy. The age at which a future writer became literate is not normally included in the lede of their article. The use of "enslaver" in the sense of "master" may be a new development in the English language, but it is much simpler than
|
The timeline at the end of this article is... quite nonstandard. I'm not sure if it is appropriate to include. Further, I would note that the listings are mostly based on a single source, footnoted only once, and open to potential accusations of copyvio. Additionally, because it is not footnoted line by line, there is a strong chance that well-meaning editors would add information not provided in that source and, therefore, the integrity of that footnote and the entire section is compromised. Unless someone can provide samples of recognized quality biography articles with a similar timeline, I would propose removing it entirely. -- Midnightdreary ( talk) 17:04, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
The Supreme Court refuses to grant freedom to Dred Scott, a slave living on free soil in Missouri Territory, our article has
Supreme Court ruling on Dred Scott: Blacks had "no rights which the white man was bound to respect". As in other timelines, verifiability is provided by links to the respective articles. Since the source contains some errors (cf. the statement on Dred Scott), I'd also be reluctant to have an external link to it. BTW: The source doesn't mention The Raven - horrible fault ;-)
Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Gilbert Studios photograph of Harriet Jacobs.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for March 7, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-03-07. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Adam Cuerden ( talk)Has about 7.9% of all FPs 11:58, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
La Wally is an opera in four acts by composer Alfredo Catalani, to a libretto by Luigi Illica, first performed at La Scala, Milan, in 1892. The story is set in the Austrian Tyrol where the heroine Wally is in love with Giuseppe Hagenbach. However, her father, Stromminger, wants her to marry Vincenzo Gellner. The opera concludes with Hagenbach and Wally pledging their love for each other, but being killed by an avalanche. La Wally was Catalani's last opera. This 1892 illustration by Adolfo Hohenstein depicts the Act I costume design for the title character Wally. Painting credit: Adolfo Hohenstein; restored by Adam Cuerden
Recently featured:
|
I think there are too many extraneous and tangential images cluttering this article. Agree or disagree? --Animalparty! ( talk) 23:40, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
This sounds to me as if the Horniblows had been the ones who originally made her a slave. I presume that she had been born a slave and that the people who originally made her ancestors slaves (had 'enslaved' them) were some West African chieftains and/or European slave-traders. The Horniblows were just her owners at the moment. Maybe this wording is meant to be a way to make their ownership of a slave sound more violent and thus more blameworthy or something? In any case, it seems to blur the distinction between different meanings and different factual claims. 87.126.21.225 ( talk) 20:23, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
"...the distance as the crow flies between the two houses was only 600 feet (180 m)." Any reason why this sentence uses a WP:IDIOM? Why not just say the distance between the two houses was only 600 feet? Muzilon ( talk) 08:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)