Poetry is a
former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check
the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
poetry 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.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Literature 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us
assess and improve articles to
good and
1.0 standards, or visit the
wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
The History section of the article, Poetry is missing some historical information on poetry (such as biblical poetry) and also has information that possibly should be in another section (such as information on poetics). The History section is under-represented and could use some love. The citations in this section are well presented and there isn't any missing citations that I can tell.
EmilyReNew (
talk)
17:47, 27 March 2019 (UTC)reply
Until 12 October 2022, the lead to the "
Poetry" article featured, as illustration,
Raphael's elegant fresco painting "
The Parnassus", which represents the
concept of poetry.
I submit that Raphael's allegorical painting is highly suitable to illustrate the concept of poetry and is preferable to a particular verse by an arbitrarily selected poet.
I propose that Raphael's painting be reinstated as the illustration in the lead to the "Poetry" article.
Nihil novi, sorry with my late reply I don't agree with using allegorical paintings because it does not illustrate the topic directly. It is like putting pretty pic of goddess in an article about
science or
music for that matter. Sure, my poem on the wall image is not the best but it does illustrate the topic directly, which frankly is the most important thing a lead image should do.
CactiStaccingCrane (
talk)
10:57, 10 November 2022 (UTC)reply
One may debate the indispensability of an
allegorical illustration for the lead of the "
Poetry" article.
However, placing an arbitrarily selected poem in the lead would be akin to using, as a lead illustration to the "
Physics" article, a particular, arbitrarily selected
law of physics.
But that's exactly what the picture in physics is all about: random pics of physical phenomena that are representative tof the topic. Maybe we should make a collage of poems instead.
CactiStaccingCrane (
talk)
23:05, 10 November 2022 (UTC)reply
For another Wikipedia article that illustrates a
concept with artistic representations, please see "
Virtue", which includes multiple such illustrations, including another lead
Raphaelallegorical fresco, of Cardinal and Theological Virtues (1511).
The only thing common to all poems — which can be rhyming or blank, in verses or not, narrative, emotional or descriptive in content — is that the line endings are fixed in relation to the text. In prose, they are not generally significant.
2A00:23C5:5A8B:BC01:6922:957B:E71D:A58A (
talk)
17:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)reply
The form and structure of a poem, Is not simply in its line endings alone.
For example, consider the haiku, A form so strict, yet beautiful too. Five, seven, five, its syllable count, A strict framework, without a doubt.
Or the sonnet, with fourteen lines, A rhyme scheme that often entwines. With fixed iambic pentameter, Its structure couldn't be any better.
And let us not forget the villanelle, With repeating lines that cast a spell. A strict form that must be followed, Its beauty cannot be swallowed.
There's a longstanding dispute between me and
User:Nihil novi at
Talk:Poetry#"Poetry" lead illustration on whether to include picture in the lead, which hasn't been resolved in 7 months. So, I will let the community decide:
Option 4 (which I've just added) I'm not generally opposed to the concept of an image illustrating this article, but neither of those images are a good fit. The Rafael image leaves me scratching my head regarding the relevance, an image of a poem is relevant but the framing of that photograph makes it unclear what its meant to be illustrating and why.
Thryduulf (
talk)
09:18, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
I'll see if I can get time to have a look, but if I don't then my preference order is Option 4 (1st) > Option 1 > Option 3 > Option 2.
Thryduulf (
talk)
00:08, 1 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 3 / Option 1 (
Summoned by bot). With reference to the foregoing discussion, I agree that a concrete exemplar directly illustrating the subject is broadly preferable to an artistic abstraction in an entirely different realm of medium. And, perhaps more to the point, I think such a direct representation is more consistent with the relevant priorities laid out in policy. As to the argument that it is just one of countless examples of the subject matter of this article, that is not really a compelling reason for eschewing it in favour of a painting: many (indeed, probably most) articles contain images of exemplars that are just one specimen from amongst countless possibilities, and we often have to make arbitrary choices, if image quality and clarity of representation are roughly equal factors between the options. Any number of other representations of poems would be equally acceptable, if the images can be found. And indeed, given the subject matter, this is a rare instance where the option of having no image would make a certain degree of sense as well. But I'd put option 2 at the bottom of this hierarchy. It just feels a little too weak in terms of illustrative potency and clarity for this context, imo. SnowRise let's rap09:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 2 summoned by bot. However, I do agree with CactiStaccingCrane's sentiment and would support something like the alternative if it were of higher quality. ~
HAL33313:35, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Both Raphael frescos nicely illustrate their respective concepts and add allure to pages that otherwise would present a dry appearance.
The allegorical nature of these illustrations carries a universal quality and avoids the arbitrariness of a particular quotation from a randomly selected poet.
A few thoughts there, Nihil. First, even if we put aside the kinda OTHERSTUFF element of the argument, I'd argue the comparison to the
virtue is something of a false analogy: the concept of "virtue" does not lend itself to having exemplars that can be physically represented: virtues are intangible things, perceived really only in abstract conception. Poems too are intangible in a sense, but being products of
natural language, they can be written down and thus have examples represented by an image. There's absolutely no reason to think that the local editors who settled on a painting for the virtue article (out of whatever line of reasoning or lack of other good option) would find a similar rational to do so here: the same paradigm just doesn't apply.
Second, and probably even more critically, I just don't see how a painting with no subject matter or thematics other than presenting a smorgasbord of famous poets actually "illustrates" anything about poetry itself. Third, there's nothing wrong with choosing an "arbitrary" poem for this article, anymore than there is with choosing a particular image of a particular butterfly for an article about that specimen's species. You can still choose from among options of a common sort by picking a higher quality image or particularly demonstrative content (a poem with a more obvious meter that can be described in caption, as just one of a thousand possibilities). Fourth, I don't really think the 'dryness' of the imagery should be a compelling factor here: in terms of encyclopedic clarity, often the dry image is the way to go. Just food for thought! I mean, it's a beautiful work and I'm a sucker for a work featuring the muses, but as a lead image for this topic, I just don't see it. SnowRise let's rap23:43, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 1, no image. The Raphael painting, to my mind, fails
MOS:PERTINENCE; it looks like it's just there for decoration, rather than to aid the reader's understanding of what poetry is. The Option 3 image is too visually distracting; it takes me a moment to work out what I'm looking at, and then the angle of the text, set side-by-side against the text of the article, has an unsettling effect. Perhaps a different illustration of the text of a poem would work, but I don't think any image is necessary here. The Literature navbox adequately performs the
stated function of a lead image – i.e., showing the reader that they're at the right article – and also meets the need for a bit of visual refreshment, which I think is the real reason most people want to see an image in the lead.
Sojourner in the earth (
talk)
09:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)reply
That's a compelling summary of the factors here: I already gave tacit support for no image as an option in my !vote, but I'm going to update the header to reflect that I think there is parity between options 1 and 3. SnowRise let's rap02:12, 2 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 1: Poetry is an intrinsically abstract concept, as an art genre, and no single example or depiction is going to be adequately illustrative or representative. Better to let the readers simply read the lead summary unencumbered by distractions.
Iskandar323 (
talk)
10:34, 1 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 1: For the same reasons given by Iskandar above. Any image would likely just distract. Also, the navbox technically already has an image—the clip art–like picture with the books and the scroll. That seems adequate to satisfy any sort of subconscious visual need that a reader may have.
Pillowcrow (
talk)
22:09, 9 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Not option 2, which is more confusing than informative. It is not at all obvious what it has to do with poetry until you read the description, and even after reading the description I don't feel that the image has increased my understanding of poetry very much. I agree with
User:Snow Rise that it's better for the lead image to illustrate the subject directly than to include a painting that is only abstractly related.
Option 1, per Iskandar's arguments. Option 2 requires some effort to understand how it is related to the topic and Option 3 isn't a great picture and is a bit Anglo-centric to boot.
Alaexis¿question?08:22, 19 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 2 I think this article would be less appealing to readers without a lead image. The Raphael is an attractive and highly relevant image.
𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (
talk)
14:03, 29 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Article lead change
I am proposing changing the second sentence from this: A '''poem''' is a [[Composition (language)|literary composition]], written by a [[poet]], using this principle.
to this: A [[Composition (language)|composition]] written in poetry is called a '''poem''', and one who writes poetry is a [[poet]]. (or, anyway, something like that.) Apmh16:49, 22 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Poetry is a
former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check
the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
poetry 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.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Literature 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us
assess and improve articles to
good and
1.0 standards, or visit the
wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
The History section of the article, Poetry is missing some historical information on poetry (such as biblical poetry) and also has information that possibly should be in another section (such as information on poetics). The History section is under-represented and could use some love. The citations in this section are well presented and there isn't any missing citations that I can tell.
EmilyReNew (
talk)
17:47, 27 March 2019 (UTC)reply
Until 12 October 2022, the lead to the "
Poetry" article featured, as illustration,
Raphael's elegant fresco painting "
The Parnassus", which represents the
concept of poetry.
I submit that Raphael's allegorical painting is highly suitable to illustrate the concept of poetry and is preferable to a particular verse by an arbitrarily selected poet.
I propose that Raphael's painting be reinstated as the illustration in the lead to the "Poetry" article.
Nihil novi, sorry with my late reply I don't agree with using allegorical paintings because it does not illustrate the topic directly. It is like putting pretty pic of goddess in an article about
science or
music for that matter. Sure, my poem on the wall image is not the best but it does illustrate the topic directly, which frankly is the most important thing a lead image should do.
CactiStaccingCrane (
talk)
10:57, 10 November 2022 (UTC)reply
One may debate the indispensability of an
allegorical illustration for the lead of the "
Poetry" article.
However, placing an arbitrarily selected poem in the lead would be akin to using, as a lead illustration to the "
Physics" article, a particular, arbitrarily selected
law of physics.
But that's exactly what the picture in physics is all about: random pics of physical phenomena that are representative tof the topic. Maybe we should make a collage of poems instead.
CactiStaccingCrane (
talk)
23:05, 10 November 2022 (UTC)reply
For another Wikipedia article that illustrates a
concept with artistic representations, please see "
Virtue", which includes multiple such illustrations, including another lead
Raphaelallegorical fresco, of Cardinal and Theological Virtues (1511).
The only thing common to all poems — which can be rhyming or blank, in verses or not, narrative, emotional or descriptive in content — is that the line endings are fixed in relation to the text. In prose, they are not generally significant.
2A00:23C5:5A8B:BC01:6922:957B:E71D:A58A (
talk)
17:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)reply
The form and structure of a poem, Is not simply in its line endings alone.
For example, consider the haiku, A form so strict, yet beautiful too. Five, seven, five, its syllable count, A strict framework, without a doubt.
Or the sonnet, with fourteen lines, A rhyme scheme that often entwines. With fixed iambic pentameter, Its structure couldn't be any better.
And let us not forget the villanelle, With repeating lines that cast a spell. A strict form that must be followed, Its beauty cannot be swallowed.
There's a longstanding dispute between me and
User:Nihil novi at
Talk:Poetry#"Poetry" lead illustration on whether to include picture in the lead, which hasn't been resolved in 7 months. So, I will let the community decide:
Option 4 (which I've just added) I'm not generally opposed to the concept of an image illustrating this article, but neither of those images are a good fit. The Rafael image leaves me scratching my head regarding the relevance, an image of a poem is relevant but the framing of that photograph makes it unclear what its meant to be illustrating and why.
Thryduulf (
talk)
09:18, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
I'll see if I can get time to have a look, but if I don't then my preference order is Option 4 (1st) > Option 1 > Option 3 > Option 2.
Thryduulf (
talk)
00:08, 1 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 3 / Option 1 (
Summoned by bot). With reference to the foregoing discussion, I agree that a concrete exemplar directly illustrating the subject is broadly preferable to an artistic abstraction in an entirely different realm of medium. And, perhaps more to the point, I think such a direct representation is more consistent with the relevant priorities laid out in policy. As to the argument that it is just one of countless examples of the subject matter of this article, that is not really a compelling reason for eschewing it in favour of a painting: many (indeed, probably most) articles contain images of exemplars that are just one specimen from amongst countless possibilities, and we often have to make arbitrary choices, if image quality and clarity of representation are roughly equal factors between the options. Any number of other representations of poems would be equally acceptable, if the images can be found. And indeed, given the subject matter, this is a rare instance where the option of having no image would make a certain degree of sense as well. But I'd put option 2 at the bottom of this hierarchy. It just feels a little too weak in terms of illustrative potency and clarity for this context, imo. SnowRise let's rap09:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 2 summoned by bot. However, I do agree with CactiStaccingCrane's sentiment and would support something like the alternative if it were of higher quality. ~
HAL33313:35, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Both Raphael frescos nicely illustrate their respective concepts and add allure to pages that otherwise would present a dry appearance.
The allegorical nature of these illustrations carries a universal quality and avoids the arbitrariness of a particular quotation from a randomly selected poet.
A few thoughts there, Nihil. First, even if we put aside the kinda OTHERSTUFF element of the argument, I'd argue the comparison to the
virtue is something of a false analogy: the concept of "virtue" does not lend itself to having exemplars that can be physically represented: virtues are intangible things, perceived really only in abstract conception. Poems too are intangible in a sense, but being products of
natural language, they can be written down and thus have examples represented by an image. There's absolutely no reason to think that the local editors who settled on a painting for the virtue article (out of whatever line of reasoning or lack of other good option) would find a similar rational to do so here: the same paradigm just doesn't apply.
Second, and probably even more critically, I just don't see how a painting with no subject matter or thematics other than presenting a smorgasbord of famous poets actually "illustrates" anything about poetry itself. Third, there's nothing wrong with choosing an "arbitrary" poem for this article, anymore than there is with choosing a particular image of a particular butterfly for an article about that specimen's species. You can still choose from among options of a common sort by picking a higher quality image or particularly demonstrative content (a poem with a more obvious meter that can be described in caption, as just one of a thousand possibilities). Fourth, I don't really think the 'dryness' of the imagery should be a compelling factor here: in terms of encyclopedic clarity, often the dry image is the way to go. Just food for thought! I mean, it's a beautiful work and I'm a sucker for a work featuring the muses, but as a lead image for this topic, I just don't see it. SnowRise let's rap23:43, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 1, no image. The Raphael painting, to my mind, fails
MOS:PERTINENCE; it looks like it's just there for decoration, rather than to aid the reader's understanding of what poetry is. The Option 3 image is too visually distracting; it takes me a moment to work out what I'm looking at, and then the angle of the text, set side-by-side against the text of the article, has an unsettling effect. Perhaps a different illustration of the text of a poem would work, but I don't think any image is necessary here. The Literature navbox adequately performs the
stated function of a lead image – i.e., showing the reader that they're at the right article – and also meets the need for a bit of visual refreshment, which I think is the real reason most people want to see an image in the lead.
Sojourner in the earth (
talk)
09:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)reply
That's a compelling summary of the factors here: I already gave tacit support for no image as an option in my !vote, but I'm going to update the header to reflect that I think there is parity between options 1 and 3. SnowRise let's rap02:12, 2 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 1: Poetry is an intrinsically abstract concept, as an art genre, and no single example or depiction is going to be adequately illustrative or representative. Better to let the readers simply read the lead summary unencumbered by distractions.
Iskandar323 (
talk)
10:34, 1 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 1: For the same reasons given by Iskandar above. Any image would likely just distract. Also, the navbox technically already has an image—the clip art–like picture with the books and the scroll. That seems adequate to satisfy any sort of subconscious visual need that a reader may have.
Pillowcrow (
talk)
22:09, 9 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Not option 2, which is more confusing than informative. It is not at all obvious what it has to do with poetry until you read the description, and even after reading the description I don't feel that the image has increased my understanding of poetry very much. I agree with
User:Snow Rise that it's better for the lead image to illustrate the subject directly than to include a painting that is only abstractly related.
Option 1, per Iskandar's arguments. Option 2 requires some effort to understand how it is related to the topic and Option 3 isn't a great picture and is a bit Anglo-centric to boot.
Alaexis¿question?08:22, 19 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Option 2 I think this article would be less appealing to readers without a lead image. The Raphael is an attractive and highly relevant image.
𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (
talk)
14:03, 29 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Article lead change
I am proposing changing the second sentence from this: A '''poem''' is a [[Composition (language)|literary composition]], written by a [[poet]], using this principle.
to this: A [[Composition (language)|composition]] written in poetry is called a '''poem''', and one who writes poetry is a [[poet]]. (or, anyway, something like that.) Apmh16:49, 22 June 2023 (UTC)reply