Talk:Adelaide Anne Procter

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleAdelaide Anne Procter is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 16, 2013.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 28, 2009Good article nomineeListed
August 23, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
September 27, 2009Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 30, 2017, and October 30, 2021.
Current status: Featured article

GA nom[edit]

I've re-done the entire article, as the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica text was wholly inadequate and sexist to boot. Sadly, there's not much out there on AAP, but I believe I've found all major sources. I don't know if the article is beefy enough to warrant GA, but I'm nominating it anyway just to see. Ricardiana (talk) 05:06, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job[edit]

This article looks pretty much like a one-person job. It's very informative. Thank you for all the effort. Jeffmatt (talk) 18:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - and you're welcome! Ricardiana (talk) 21:00, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FAC nomination[edit]

This article is currently nominated for Featured Article status. Please follow the link at the very top of the page to leave comments. Ricardiana (talk) 20:49, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How did this article ever make FA status?[edit]

It's illiterate, mis-spelt and unencyclopedic:

"Procter never married. Reason unknown because she died as a single young woman, but probably wanted to do more in life then choosing the simple path of becoming an married woman."

Tirailleur (talk) 20:46, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see that quote there. Did someone fix it already?--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:42, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As you could easily see by reviewing the article's history,[1] that sentence was both added and reverted just today. FA tend to attract a lot of ill-considered edits. Dwpaul Talk 21:43, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am reviewing this article as part of WP:URFA/2020, an initiative to review Wikipedia's oldest featured articles. I am concerned that this article does not include post-2009 sources, which could be used to expand upon the article and make the "Literary career" section more comprehensive. Examples of sources that I found are below:

  • Gill Gregory, The Life and Work of Adelaide Procter: Poetry, Feminism and Fathers [2]
  • Karen Dieleman, Religious Imaginaries: The Liturgical and Poetic Practices of Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Christina Rossetti, and Adelaide Procter [3]
  • S Rogers Transforming the Fallen Woman in Adelaide Anne Procter's “A Legend of Provence” [4]
  • Cheri Lin Larsen Hoeckley The Dynamics of Poetics and Forgiveness in Adelaide Procter's ‘Homeless’ [5]
  • Emily Harrington The Expiration of Commitments in Adelaide Procter's “Homeward Bound” [6]

Is anyone willing to take a look at these sources to see if they should be included in the artice, or should this be sent to WP:FAR? Z1720 (talk) 20:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]