Talk:Jones Very

Good article
I really appreciate how well-cited this article is. It seems, to me, a great example of a solid Wikipedia entry. --66.30.117.67 (talk) 00:49, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! It took a lot of work to get it to this point - serious discussions of Very's life and work are hard to come by. Even with all the scouring I did, the last few years of his life (really, the last couple decades) are virtually unexplored in this article. I hope to find more some day! --Midnightdreary (talk) 01:19, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd endorse a GA nomination as well if the "Critical assessment" section didn't end with Channing, Dana and Griswold. Aren't there any more recent voices? --Janneman (talk) 18:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC) Uh, it's got GA already, well, for the upcoming FA nomination then. --Janneman (talk) 18:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Critical Assessment
I added a paragraph, largely as a response to User Janneman's remark above, on the reassessment of Very initiated by Yvor Winters and William Irving Bartlett in the last century.Tristan noir (talk) 03:31, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks good at first glance. Thanks so much for adding it. --Midnightdreary (talk) 04:38, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Midnightdreary. The Deese introduction offers a broad overview of Very’s modern reception from Winters & Bartlett until the date of publication (1993), particularly pp xxxviii-xlv. I was hesitant to include more but you may wish to review Deese in order to determine if more detail is justified. This article is balanced and well-sourced; I see from the edit history that you've devoted much labor to it. Congratulations. I wonder only if addition of a Very sonnet might be justified? “The Hand and Foot,” if so, might be representative.Tristan noir (talk) 05:56, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, we shouldn't make judgment calls on what constitutes representative work here (that violates NPOV and OR policies), and we don't usually include that stuff here anyway. But Wikisource is a sister project that collects public domain or works which are otherwise copyright free. It would be nice to have a full page for Very's works there. --Midnightdreary (talk) 03:25, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I see your point. "Sample" might have been a better choice of words than "representative." I've seen quotations of a poet's work on other pages (see Robert Bridges, for example). For that reason, I believed the practice acceptable as long as presentation was neutral and the example was selected from work in the public domain as is Very's. It's a minor point, anyway, and the absence of a sample doesn't detract from what is a good article.Tristan noir (talk) 04:11, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jones Very. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070421201111/http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/poets/very.php to http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/poets/very.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:42, 27 April 2017 (UTC)