Judith Sargent Murray [1]

Aimee Barbeau17 ( talk) 04:15, 30 September 2014 (UTC) reply

All of these topics look promising, Aimee Barbeau17. To narrow down which of these authors you may want to work on, take a look at the Article Talk pages for each. You may also want to contribute a spur page discussing criticism and significance of a notable work by one of these authors that isn't already covered on Wikipedia. You can also revise pages to cross lost these authors or their works to related topics. I look forward to seeing your final decision!

A note on formatting: above, you've inserted citations and external links for your topics. If you are linking to another article in Wikipedia (and not to an outside source), you only need to use the internal link markup. So, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, not [2]. Nadinecross78 ( talk) 18:52, 6 October 2014 (UTC) reply

To further the knowledge on the life and works of Judith Sargent Murray, I plan to insert the following information:

• A revised introduction on the author
• A section that will expound on the author's political and moral views
• A religious background of the author and how religion may/may not have impacted her writing
• If possible, a more complete list of the author's works
• Separate author's family life from her education
• Information on the author's tone, writing style, and the response of the audience

Aimee Barbeau17 ( talk) 18:19, 16 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Appearance You seem to have a good grasp of what you would like to do, however I suggest adding internal links to the pages you would like to edit

Neutrality I would suggest to use someone's research on how religion may/may not have impactedd her writing because Wiki does not allow "opinion" based edits

Notability Yes this all should be mentioned for readers to grasp Murray's life better.

Redundancy I do not believe you have committed any redundancy errors.

Relevance The edits are concerned with American literature and the author based on researched and not personal opinions.

Focus Please be a little more detailed about what you plan to revise in the introduction. Will you put information on author's tone, writing style, and response of audience all in one section, or will you create individual sections for these?

Alexisyos ( talk) 20:12, 16 October 2014 (UTC) reply

In the near future I plan on making a few revisions to the Judith Sargent Murray Wikipedia page. These revisions include a revised introduction to the page, a more detailed section covering Murray's political and moral views, and a more complete list of Murray's works. I also plan on creating a spur page that will link from one of her most popular essays, "On Equality of the Sexes." Considering this essay had a huge impact on it's audience, I believe it deserves a page of its own. Hopefully, I can get a decent start on this new page and it will be free for other Wiki users to add onto in the future.

Aimee Barbeau17 ( talk) 17:19, 29 October 2014 (UTC) reply

These edits sound good, Aimee Barbeau17. On the stub page for "On Equality of the Sexes," you'll want to be sure to include enough information to meet notability requirements. In other words, while you should summarize the essay, you also need to give convincing, verifiable evidence for why the essay is significant. I've also noted that the bulleted topic list and the summary don't contain any internal links to the article you are editing, in this case Judith Sargent Murray. Always include internal links so I can find what you are working on, and so that other can to. In tern linking is what enables research on Wikipedia. Finally, the post you've added to the article talk page is identical to the summary here, though the rhetorical situation is different for both components of the assignment. in other words, the posting in the article talk page should refer to edits on the specific page in question (this article) and not in a detached way ("the article on Judith Sargent Murray"). Nadinecross78 ( talk) 21:32, 1 November 2014 (UTC) reply

A tag has been placed on Template:"On the Equality of the Sexes," requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. —PC -XT + 09:03, 24 November 2014 (UTC) reply

To be clear, I did not nominate the article "On the Equality of the Sexes", only this template that duplicates the article without sources and apparently was made by mistake? —PC -XT + 11:04, 24 November 2014 (UTC) reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article "On the Equality of the Sexes" is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/"On the Equality of the Sexes" until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --Animalparty-- ( talk) 05:19, 25 November 2014 (UTC) reply