Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Ode on Indolence/archive1

Fowler's claims

 * 1. "Shouldn't we be saying somewhere that this is a poem; the title, after all, could be that of a short-story or even a novel."
 * He attempts to argue that "Ode on Indolence" would be the title of something besides an ode. He also ignores that the word "poet" is used in the sentence, and the next sentence began with "poem". Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 2. "Incorrect use of "though." What follows after "though" is a counterpoint to nothing that precedes it. "
 * Incorrect. "It is one of five odes he wrote that spring ... though the precise dates of composition remain unknown." It is clear that "spring" a seemingly definite time is able to be contrasted with "though" to say that there is no actual certainty. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 3. ""Remain unknown?" The reader has no idea that a search had been afoot for these dates. Better to say, "are unknown.""
 * He would introduce the present tense into a paragraph using the past time. This is an error. "remain" suggests that the date has not yet been found, which has a completely different implication than the use of the present tense of "to be".


 * 4. "The use of "unlike," again, assumes that the reader knows something about the other poems."
 * The use of "unlike" suggests a contrast, which the rest of the sentence reveals. This is standard usage. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 4a. "I said that if you are going to use "unlike" or "in contrast to," you need to provide a context (which I provided by adding, "which were published ...")."
 * He then changes his claim from requiring the use of "in contrast" to state that it was really something else that was a problem. The "which were published" is completely redundant and unnecessary, as the "unlike" would already suggest a truth about the opposite form. This is standard grammatical and rhetorical use. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 5. "Again, incorrect use of "though.""
 * "Though" is appropriate, as there is a contrast between it not being published and being a favorite of the poet. The word "though" is used in this manner in the cited source. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 6. "Poor paraphrasing"
 * This boils down to him claiming that 1. Keats did not mean what he said and 2. That "most favorite" would not imply that he liked it more than everything else. Both are shown as being inaccurate claims in multiple sources. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 7. ""Follows" is ambiguous. Does it mean "traces," or "comes after?""
 * He is arguing with standard usage of the word "follows" when describing how a plot is traced through a narrative. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 8. "Misplaced m-dashes. Better to say, "... when three figures, A, L, and P, appear dressed in ..."
 * He claims that the dashes are misplaced. He then removes them and uses commas. He later claims that the dashes should stay, although it is clearly not true as seen in the quote. It is also not the mdashes he cares about. It was the use of "appear" before the dashes. There is a major difference with this. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 9. ""Examine" is ambiguous here. Does it mean "consider" or "quiz?""
 * The word "examine" has a very clear definition and implication. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 10. "Confusing shifts in the sentence. Better to say, "Although it has received less critical acclaim than Keats's other 1819 poems, "Ode on Indolence" is important both for the themes and imagery that it shares with Keats's body of work (if that is meant) and for the biographical insights it provides.""
 * There was nothing confusing in the sentence as the issues were very straight forward. However, the above idea introduces words and concepts that are false and go against the summary of the page. This is an introduction of errors. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 11. He has concerns with ""In the spring of 1819," and says that it cannot be a typo.
 * It clearly was a typo, as it was supposed to be "by" and not "in". Bate et al refer back to the anxiety caused from him abandoning Guy's Hospital. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 12. "When someone has been devoting himself full time for two years to writing poetry, they are no longer in the planning stage of a career."
 * Patently wrong. Keats did not have a career in poetry as he was not making enough money to support himself. Writers and the rest can be in a planning phase their whole life. A plan is a plan until it comes to fruition. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 13. "Disregarding, for now, the fact that "racked" is the more common spelling, what does "chose to seek projects" mean? Do you mean "looked for employment?" The job of a surgeon on an East Indiaman, which Keats considered, is not a project.
 * There is a difference between "racked" and "wracked". One is being tortured on a rack, the other is being in a wreck. The position of a surgeon was not the only possibility that Keats considered and "projects" means various types of work. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 14. "The sentence is ambiguous: does it mean that the beginning of the ode is an epigraph in Matthew 6:28 or that the ode's epigraph is taken from Matthew 6:28? "Epigraph," in any case, as its own page informs us, is a quote preceding the text; it is therefore redundant when you use "begins.""
 * The sentence is not ambiguous as it is grammatically clear. Furthermore, there is no redundancy as people state that works begin with a "preface" or "prologues", and other works do not. If -all- works began with an epigraph, then it would be redundant. Since there is a possibility of -no- epigraph, then there can be no redundancy. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 15. "Do you mean, "the text that follows," or "the ensuing text," or "the subsequent text," or "the text proper?" "The following text" is ambiguous, since it can mean the text that is to follow (say, as an example in the article itself)."
 * There is no ambiguity in standard English grammar here. The text that follows refers back to the previous sentence as "epigraph" was the only concept introduced that is an appropriate object. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 16. "You mean "Keats's use of both the iambic pentameter and the ABAB rhyme scheme in the first four lines of each stanza shows an adherence to a/the Classical poem structure." ("Classical," moreover, especially when you capitalize it, needs to be linked to something.)"
 * There is no "the iambic pentameter", and suggesting that such exists is ridiculous. Would someone say artists use "the paint when painting" or a writers use "the pen when writing". "Iambic pentameter" is a concept, not a single entity, and cannot be used with "the" in the English language in such a sentence. He then suggests to alter the indefinite "an ABAB rhyme scheme" to the definite "the ABAB", which would be to claim that there is one type, which is also silly. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 17. "What is a "classical formation?" Do you mean "classical form?" "Classical formation" means something else. Or perhaps you mean, "classical tradition," especially when you are using "breaks from?""
 * Classical formation, not classical form or classical tradition, as the poem was -formed-. He broke away from the way of forming the poem, which was the classical formation of poetry. He did not break away from the classical "form", as the form follows the formation and is secondary to the formation. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 18. ""a series of" is redundant when you say "each stanza.""
 * "with a series of asymmetrical 6-line endings to each stanza referred" would require "a series of", as the rest of the sentence would lose all sense of certainty and sound rather ridiculous. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)