Talk:Original Stories from Real Life/Archive 1

Please add edit summaries
Although you are not mandated to do so by Wiki law, please explain what you are doing (and why) in the edit summaries. It is a common courtesy to other editors. Thanks! Sanjay Tiwari 00:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Will do. Thanks for making me aware of that.Awadewit 19:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Links and References
Do you think that we need all of those links and references? Why not simply have one or two obvious places (a printed source and a website) where people can go to get the full text of Original Stories and some secondary materials? I'm not quite sure I understand the need for the catalogue sources.Awadewit 19:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I put them in as "place holders" (since overzealous admins put all kinds of tags in a page stub).  Well, where is the text available on the web?  Project Gutenberg doesn't have it, if my memory serves me right.  Do you know a public domain site for the text?  Also, please go ahead and put in a web site for the secondary materials.  Thanks.  Sanjay Tiwari 23:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Have pruned the references + external links. Sanjay Tiwari 23:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Genre
I noticed that you have listed this text as a novel. Is children's literature a possibility? I'm less convinced that it is a novel since it has so litle plot.Awadewit 19:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I don't know how the novel stub appeared. Will take that off.  Sanjay Tiwari 23:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, are we sure it came out in hardback? That distinction is more important for the twentieth-century than it is for the eighteenth, I think.Awadewit 03:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Good point. (I am assuming you mean the infobox.)  It probably was hardback, but I agree it  does not deserve to be mentioned.  Will take it off.  Sanjay Tiwari 09:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * FYI: Abebooks.com Search results for Wollstonecraft: Original Stories. PS Were you able to find a public domain site for the text? Sanjay Tiwari 09:42, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I cannot find OS on the web anywhere. I have added the standard Wollstonecraft edition to the bibliography since the anthologies only have excerpts. Awadewit 06:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Print run
I would like to return to the issue of the print run of Original Stories. I would still be more comfortable saying 1818 (National Union Catalogue information) or 1820 than 1835. If you click on the record that lists 1835 from your source, it actually has that date in brackets with a question mark after it. We have no way of knowing how that date was arrived at.Awadewit 03:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I don't know how they decided it was 1835. Have changed it to 1820.  Both the British Library and the Aberdeen library have the 1820 versions.  Plus, I saw it advertised on Alibris.  Sanjay Tiwari 09:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations
on a very solid, well-written article. I will try to offer some more concrete suggestions soon, but the fact that I have none now, after one reading, suggests that there won't be many. I particularly like the discussion on class, and the way the text is firmly placed within a historical context. As someone with only a passing familiarity with the history of children's literature, I am idly wondering how this text compares with the many, explicitly punitive, childrens's texts of the period. There is some indication in the mention of the interpolated tales, but not enough to satisfy my morbid curiousity. Too bad that there is no etext available, if I understand the discussion, above. Don't know where I'm going with this, but I am curious about whether the harshness of some of the explicitly Christian texts, or generally "improving" texts, can also be found here. And if so, what does that mean? All for now; congratulations again, and I will be back for a second, and closer, read. — scribbling  woman  15:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Those themes are definitely present in this text. Unfortunately, there is nothing really written on them (see chapter two of my unpublished dissertation which I am currently turning into an article as we write!). I did see a discussion once on wikipedia that using a dissertation is acceptable when there are no other sources available, but mine is unfinished and I would feel strange about quoting myself before I am in print. There are two online versions (1788 and 1791) available from ECCO, which I am sure you have access to. I am going to put that up in the bibliography, just in case people who wander over to the article have access to ECCO. I mean, who is going to wander over who doesn't? It is so specialized. Awadewit 16:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)