Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Anna Laetitia Barbauld

Anna Laetitia Barbauld

I would appreciate having this article peer-reviewed at this point; I am aiming for GA and eventually FA. I could use a copyeditor as really only I have looked at the prose (sometimes late at night) as well as some help with the pictures (see Barbauld talk page). Thanks. Awadewit 18:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

MLilburne

A very impressive article and a pleasure to read. It is certainly worthy of GA status at the moment and in my opinion it's well on its way to being FA-ready. I've taken the liberty of changing its assessment to A-class. Just a few comments:

• The lead doesn't really live up to the standard of the rest of the article. The prose in the second paragraph is awkward, with "Barbauld also... moreover... Finally" following each other in a rather monotonous succession. I also suspect that it will get criticised at the FA stage for making slightly exaggerated claims about the importance of its subject. Both "her famous primers shaped the minds of generations" and "her rightful place in literary history" have a rather un-encyclopedic tone.

I have been having trouble with the lead. Hopefully it is better now. It still has the same "monotonous" structure, but I feel that if I started adding too much more material, I would start violating the lead requirements. It would be nice if someone else who had some knowledge about Barbauld could help me out here. :)

• The discussion about Jean-Paul Marat could have been a bit clearer. From what source do we get the information that he "supposedly" proposed to her?

See footnote 8. The source prevaricates as well.

• I don't think you really need to wikilink "poems".

I was trying to add links per the automated peer review; the links have been removed.

• This sentence reads a little awkwardly: "In 1773 Barbauld published her first book of poems, entitled simply Poems, after they 'had been handed round from friend to friend and had been greatly admired.'"

I have tried to fix this.

• The quote of the letter from Barbauld to her brother about adopting one of his children is long enough that it should be set off as a block quote. Same thing with the later Isobel Armstrong quote. (As this one is a secondary quote you may possibly be asked whether you can paraphrase the argument instead.)

Done.

• I understand what you mean by "juvenile trials" but other readers may not. A little explanation would be an improvement.

Done.

• “Elizabeth Barrett Browning could still quote the opening lines of Lessons for Children at age thirty-nine.” This quote just floats in the text without discussion or attribution. There's another one a few sentences later.

These are quotations from commentators; they have citations - see footnotes 51 and 53. I felt that they were useful information and did not need any more explanation.

In conclusion, this is a very good article that I'll be happy to support for FA once these small issues have been dealt with. MLilburne 10:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Excellent! Minor (almost trivia!) remarks:

• The lead looks to me fine now.
• "Anna Lætitia (Aikin) Barbauld". You don't have to repeat the full name.

Ok - now only "Barbauld."

• "Early life" has one huge paragraph. For layout reasons, maybe you would like to split it in two of them. Maybe you could do the same in "Political involvement and Hampstead". But the whole thing mey just be a personal reference ...

I have broken them up.

• "Barbauld now became a “woman of letters.” " It reminds me a lot a similar expression in the lead, and could be regarded as repetitive.

I have reworded the sentence.

• "Barbauld expressed some “misgivings”..." Why?

It is not clear from the source.

• "“unquestionably the first [i.e., best] of our female poets, and one of the most eloquent and powerful of our prose writers”". This quote belongs to whom exactly?

I have included the periodical title.

• "Not only ... greatest abuses of the industrial age." Maybe you should cite here.

These sentences are an explication of the Matthew Arnold sentence (which has a citation) - since it is basically repeating the same information but trying to explain it, I didn't think I needed to repeat the citation. Do I?

• Many quotes in "Poetry". I believe that some recasting into alternative language wouldn't go amiss.

I have tried to fix this.

• "Moreover, she contends that it is precisely the isolation forced on Dissenters by others that marks them out, not anything inherent in their form of worship. Finally, appealing to British patriotism, she maintains that the French cannot be allowed to outstrip the English in liberty." I think you should cite here.

I have done so.

• "Lessons for Children and Hymns in Prose had, for children’s books, an unprecedented influence; not only did they influence the poetry of William Blake and William Wordsworth[50], they also influenced generations of school children." A bit repetitive IMO.

You are absolutely right - how embarrassing. It is fixed.

• Very well-reseached.

Conclusion: I think this is ready for FAC.--Yannismarou 12:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)