Talk:Geoffrey Hill

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Poetry Mid‑importance

	Poetry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Worcestershire Low‑importance

	Worcestershire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Worcestershire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Worcestershire-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WorcestershireWikipedia:WikiProject WorcestershireTemplate:WikiProject WorcestershireWorcestershire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Serious rewriting needed[edit]

Sentences such as the following are grossly inappropriate for a non-technical audience:

"The constant buffets of Hill's suspicion or scrupulous wariness of lyric eloquence—can it truly be eloquent?—against his powerful talent for it (in Syon, a sky is 'livid with unshed snow') become in the poems a sort of battle in style, where passages of singing force (ToL: 'The ferns / are breast-high, head-high, the days / lustrous, with their hinterlands of thunder') are balanced with ones of prose-like academese and inscrutable syntax."

(Was the editor attempting to illustrate inscrutable syntax?) It is far more important to illustrate claims with citations than with extracts, since the latter is the lit. crit. equivalent of original research. (See the following taken from the WP:NOR page:

"Our policy: Primary sources that have been reliably published (for example, by a university press or mainstream newspaper) may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. Without a secondary source, a primary source may be used only to make descriptive claims, the accuracy of which is verifiable by a reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge. For example, an article about a novel may cite passages from the novel to describe the plot, but any interpretation of those passages needs a secondary source. Do not make analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims about information found in a primary source."

)--cfp (talk) 16:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Part of the article read as obscure & pretentious. Ben Finn (talk) 08:23, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just for reference, in case it's appropriate for the article. the Wendy Cope parody is titled "Duffa Rex". Agingjb (talk) 19:05, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite sure why the link for the collection of poems "King Log" leads to the article on the Aesop fable "The Frogs Who Desired a King" which doesn't actually contain any reference to Hill's use of the phrase. Agingjb (talk) 13:13, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

misperceptions[edit]

Is that a word? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.103.145 (talk) 16:34, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

-- Of course "misperception" is a word. It isn't a marigold. 172.56.27.159 (talk) 13:34, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem[edit]

This article has been reverted by a bot to this version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot (talk) 06:10, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"latter argument"[edit]

What does "the latter argument" refer to? 172.56.27.66 (talk) 13:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a rather oddly written paragraph. I have rephrased it a little. Span (talk) 14:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tense[edit]

Following his passing, much of the article needs to be recast, also an opportunity to improve its readability. Perhaps we need to wait a bit. Stub Mandrel (talk) 17:32, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Geoffrey Hill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:13, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Geoffrey Hill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:29, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]