User talk:SeraphinaLewin/sandbox

Excellent point that specific examples might have helped the sports section, and great observations regards the potential inaccuracy of the event location for certain listed events. If you were going to verify this, how might you do so?

A really stellar idea to tidy up the three main sections with tables in place of the current messy and mismatched content.

While I agree that the notable events section is far better developed than the sporting events section, this might also reflect the frequency with which each type of event occurred.

I was impressed by your critiques of the sporting events and recorded events sections. I thought the notable events section was also ripe for expansion, as many more notable concerts must have happened over the 19 years of The Point's existence. This expanded list would mesh nicely with the Talk page’s insistence that irrelevant details about the artists are left out.

I was also struck by the odd headings used here – notable events and sporting events? Are sporting events not notable? Might we suggest subsuming the sporting events within notable events? Or renaming the sections “notable music events,” and “notable sports events.”

In terms of what you noted as missing – yes, we don’t have information about construction materials, but – having checked other Wikipedia pages about concert and events venues, this doesn’t seem to be typical of the information offered.

I agreed with you about the neutral tone, the need for more references, and I thought you engaged very helpfully with the material on the Talk Page.

EmerOToole (talk) 17:12, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi

Thanks for this work!

I've been in touch with who should weigh in with her thoughts soon.

In the meantime, here are some of mine - it's a good idea to engage with Sarah B's talk page where there's a conversation about how to deal with scholarship around Philips' sexuality. Shalor has provided some great advice on how best to move this forward. It might also be a good idea to have a chat with Sarah about who will draft this section. One of you could draft and the other could refine.

More accurate phrasing is needed to represent the fact that Pompey is the first English language play by a woman to be given a professional staging.

I urge you towards a little more neutrality of tone in your writing throughout. E.g. - can you find a more instructive term for "poetic greats."

The reference to Henry VIII is incorrect.

Overall, this is looking very promising. I suggest that you dialogue with so that you can think about how you might thematically and structurally complement each other's work. EmerOToole (talk) 19:01, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Seraphina, Sorry that my feedback is late. This all looks great! I do agree with your idea to move her marriage from the career section to the early life section. And I do think it would be interesting to acknowledge any queer relationships she may have had but try to find more than one source about it. I would encourage you to use more nuanced language. I also have strong feelings about how we write about women in history and would love to just be like, "Hey, if you think Yeats is cool, wait until you hear about this badass lady!!!". Consider having the "sporting events" and "notable events" sections combined into a section called "notable cultural events". Overall, you seem to be going in the right direction and it seems like your research is going to be extensive (which i love!). Good luck! Apaigeinabook (talk) 20:56, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Seraphina,

This is looking really great. I spoke to briefly about how you two might start moving your shared work to Wiki. You have both done some nice work on the early life section, so I have asked Sarah to take yours and hers and amalgamate the info. This will leave you to work on the intro section - which is looking good - and your new section on the staging of Pompey. Tag me when those sections are reworked. When this is done, you will be finished with your wiki assignment! Nearly there!

Okay for the intro section, the following line needs some syntactical editing "her adaptation of Pompey was the first English language play to be given a professional staging by a woman" because it sounds like it was the first play to be staged by a woman as opposed to the first play by a woman to be staged. I would delete "as being influential in her writing, and ahead of her time" as these claims would need references, and, in fact, the sentence reads more authoritatively without it. Finally, I would rework the last line, aiming for further neutrality of tone. In communicating that a key theme in her work is fervent inner relationships with other women, I would avoid indicating that the theme of relationships with women makes her significant in the literary community, and I would avoid the part about mystery. Keep it as bare-bones and factual as possible.

With regards to the new section you are proposing on political/personal controversy - you might name this section something different to indicate that it is primarily about the politics of Pompey. Maybe "The Politics of Pompey"? Maybe can weigh in here with ideas? Also, Sarah is going to develop the material on Philips' sexuality, so you can cut the last line as this will be covered elsewhere.

Some writing notes for the section: - consider "Pierre Corneille's French verse tragedy, Pompée," which would allow you to cut the following line. - the second line needs more neutrality. Get rid of the stuff about it being monumental or shaking audiences and instead strip it down to something like "it was the first English-language play by a woman to be given a professional staging, and was notable for its political undertones." - the third sentence is too long and complicated and needs to be broken into two or even three and edited for clarity. Also avoid "all political backgrounds" here. "Many" or "Differing" will work better than "All." - fourth sentence is excellent - fifth - cut the second half, as Morash is dramatising somewhat, which works very well in his text, but does not belong on wikipedia - final - very, very good. A little repetitious. No need for second mention of two rivals. I would add a little more information to the second and third clause: "and this must have resonated with the audience, as, following the English Civil War and the Cromwellian conquest of Ireland, Dublin was split politically."

This is looking great,. Address these issues and you are all done! EmerOToole (talk) 18:35, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi

The introductory section looks really great now. I would change the line "In 1663, her adaptation of Pompey was the first English language play staged professionally by a woman" to "In 1663, her adaptation of Pompey was the first English language play by a woman to be given a professional staging." This is because, otherwise, the syntactical confusion persists! Then please go ahead and move it.

Thank you for your great work on the early years section. As advised in my last bout of feedback, Sarah has taken your work and hers and edited this section and it now looks really good! So you do not need to make any changes on the wiki page to the early life section as it stands, but I understand and appreciate your contribution to it.

A little more care is still needed with grammar and written expression in the final section on Pompey. I would advise having a friend who is unfamiliar with the play read this paragraph for you and advise you on which points are clear and which are not. Here's how I think you could greatly improve the writing here:

Sentence 1. No Possessive apostrophe after Philips.

Sentence 4. Replace "art and theatre as a whole was a welcomed escape" with "the theatre was a welcome escape." Place a full stop after Catholic/Protestant relations.

Sentence 5. Remove the semi-colon and rewrite a sentence clearly and simply explaining the relationship between the restoration, Charles I's beheading, and the play.

Sentence 6. Remove the clause about how failure to mention the setting must have caused tension. Consider cutting this long sentence in two for clarity. Remove the final clause "Following the English Civil War and the Cromwellian conquest of Ireland, Dublin was split politically" and move it closer to the beginning of the section, so that it is now sentence 3. EmerOToole (talk) 23:51, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

This looks great,. Please go ahead and move the section on Pompey! EmerOToole (talk) 18:09, 5 December 2018 (UTC)