Talk:Jane Roberts/Archive 4

Automated Peer Review
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Automated/December_2008#Jane_Roberts

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question. You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, APR t 05:10, 9 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by NoVomit (talk • contribs)
 * The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.[?]
 * The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.[?]
 * Per Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings.
 * Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
 * Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “ All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
 * Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

Peer Review Comments
Ruhrfisch comments: Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement. I also reviewed Seth Material, so many of the criticisms there also apply here. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by NoVomit (talk • contribs)
 * The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself but Skidmore is only in the lead, for example. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way and all the main ideas. Please see WP:LEAD
 * Article needs an image
 * Article needs more references, for example the second paragraph of the Seth Material section has no refs and there are several citation needed tags. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * Per WP:MOSQUOTE you should use blockquote, not cquote. Also block quotes should be about 4 lines of text and on my screen it is only 1.5 lines, so it may be too short for a block quote.
 * There are several short (one or two sentence) paragraphs that break up the flow of the article - in most cases these should be combined with others or perhaps expanded.
 * Having read both this and the Seth Material, there is not a lot in here that is not also in the other article. There is relatively little on her life - what did she die of? Did she have children? What did she like to do besides write and channel? What did her SF works do in terms of sales?
 * Language is a bit awkward in spots - Roberts also purportedly channeled several other personalities,[1] including the philosopher William James,[6] through a process she described as using a typewriter to write "automatically",[7][8][9] and the impressionist painter Paul Cézanne.[10][1] would read much more smoothly as Roberts also purportedly channeled several other personalities,[1] including the philosopher William James[6] and the impressionist painter Paul Cézanne,[1][10] through a process she described as using a typewriter to write "automatically".[7][8][9] Note I also put the refs in numerical order.


 * I am shocked that there is almost no skepticism or negative criticism of the entire Seth phenomenon! All the "criticism" accepts Seth channeling as real. Surely there are enough members of the psychological community to be able to explain the emergence of unconscious complexes as "other" personalities. Surely there are enough philosophers or specialists in myth & religion to note that none of Seth's insights are new. I mean, where's the skeptics? (Greg Nixon)

Picture
A picture of Roberts would make this article more attractive. Keep in mind that any picture uploaded needs to have complete copyright information available. Since she is dead, under Fair Use we should be able to get a low resolution image of her to upload. It would have to satisfy all of the criteria under WP:NFC however and provide a "free use rationale". . . the J. B. Priestley and Silk Smitha are good examples. A book cover would not do unless the book in question was being discussed, but a scan of a photo from one of the books with complete copyright information might do OK. NoVomit (talk) 12:07, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, I added a picture of her, and tried to make sure the Fair Use Criteria was valid. Others may want to double check me on this. NoVomit (talk) 10:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Robert Butts Wiki
Hi, Robert Butts was at least as responsible for the Seth material as Jane Roberts (it would not have happened without both of them), and he was an artist and publisher in his own right. I was hoping someone would help add to the stub I started http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fabian_Butts

Laurel 18:36, 23 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurel (talk • contribs)

Edit for tone and style
Have edited this for encyclopedic tone and style.--Parkwells (talk) 18:55, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Clean up writing
there were a few places in this article where it's impossible to know what is being quoted and what isn't.

in the "Early Life..." section, the 4th paragraph--much of this paragraph reads as opinion, or autobiographical, or...some sort of medical diagnosis. yet there is only a long string of sources placed at the end of the paragraph. is this an actual WP practice?? i understand that a paragraph where every sentence is sourced is cumbersome, but the 'method' used here leaves the reader wondering if just the last sentence is extremely well-documented, while the rest of the paragraph emerged from some WP writer's backside.

same section, the 5th paragraph (beginning with "Jane had been going with a fellow...")--a quotation is started here:
 * She "then found out — [while she] was working in a radio factory. ...

first of all, this sentence makes NO sense. then, the "quote" runs on....i guess until the end of the paragraph. there was no way to tell really. although i did change the quotation marks used to match the first initial quote marks. good luck, whoever wants to tackle this one.

in the "Seth Material" section--the very long quotation would probably look better/read better if put into block quote format, rather than being italicized.Colbey84 (talk) 10:22, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Jane Roberts. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://newworldview.com/library/Helfrich_P_Seth_on_a_Conscious_Creation_Myth.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:41, 31 March 2016 (UTC)