Misplaced Pages

Talk:Fyodor Dostoevsky: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:05, 22 May 2013 editMiszaBot I (talk | contribs)234,552 editsm Robot: Archiving 2 threads (older than 60d) to Talk:Fyodor Dostoyevsky/Archive 4.← Previous edit Revision as of 14:08, 27 May 2013 edit undoTonyTheTiger (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers400,997 edits →Trying to avoid a brewing edit war: new sectionNext edit →
Line 294: Line 294:
I am going to change ] as it seems people will continuously complain about its copyright status, and whether de minimis applies. I would add two portraits of his parents because they are more important than his place of birth (additionally that picture is not from the 19th century...) Regards.--] '''''(])''''' 10:01, 10 May 2013 (UTC) I am going to change ] as it seems people will continuously complain about its copyright status, and whether de minimis applies. I would add two portraits of his parents because they are more important than his place of birth (additionally that picture is not from the 19th century...) Regards.--] '''''(])''''' 10:01, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
:Good idea. And those are nice pictures. --] (]) 11:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC) :Good idea. And those are nice pictures. --] (]) 11:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

== Trying to avoid a brewing edit war ==

Through my involvement at ] at has that {{user|Tomcat7}} has a long history on wikipedia of doing whatever he wants regardless of the opinions of others. We held a discussion at ] regarding a disagreement over whether navbox templates for individual works should be on the authors' pages. I felt they should, but Tomcat7, who feels they shouldn't has been removing them. 4 people ({{user|Sadads}}, {{user|GimliDotNet}}, {{user|Edokter}}, and {{user|Kuralyov}}) voiced opinions in favor of keeping them on the pages, 2 people ({{user|Deor}} and {{user|Truthkeeper88}}) voiced opinions in favor of removing them from the pages and one person ({{user|Drmies}}) supported a case-by-case analysis of inclusion on each page. Given that we are not dealing with controversial content and ] issues, there needs to be consensus to not ] content, be it prose, images, templates, tables or whatever. There was no consensus to remove the content and if a consensus of any kind existed, it was to PRESERVE the content at issue. Nonetheless, after these discussion responses came in, Tomcat7 saw fit to . I am restoring the content. If Tomcat7 insists on disregarding the opinions of others again and removes the content, I will initiate a discussion on his long history of behavior at either ] or ].--] <small>(]/]/]/]/]) </small> 14:08, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:08, 27 May 2013

Fyodor Dostoevsky is currently a Language and literature good article nominee. Nominated by Tomcat (7) at 10:47, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.


Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fyodor Dostoevsky article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 2 months 
Former featured article candidateFyodor Dostoevsky is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 27, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
August 26, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
October 10, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
October 19, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
December 26, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
January 6, 2013Peer reviewReviewed
January 26, 2013Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 1, 2013Peer reviewReviewed
April 4, 2013Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former featured article candidate
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconBiography: Arts and Entertainment / Core
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages'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
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is listed on the project's core biographies page.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconRussia: Language & literature / History / Religion Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the language and literature of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the religion in Russia task force.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconLiterature Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconChristianity: Eastern O. Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy (assessed as Mid-importance).
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconJournalism Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPhilosophy: Philosophers Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Associated task forces:
/ 
Taskforce icon
Philosophers
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconConservatism Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconLithuania Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lithuania on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LithuaniaWikipedia:WikiProject LithuaniaTemplate:WikiProject LithuaniaLithuania
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconSocialism Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Template:WP1.0
Media mentionThis Demise of the Britannica printed format has been mentioned by a media organization:
  • "Why Misplaced Pages's Fans Shouldn't Gloat". The Atlantic. March 16 2012. Compare, for example, the depth of the Misplaced Pages entries for Fyodor Dostoevsky (5,542 words, 38 references) and South Park. (12,675 words, 215 references). It's true that the Britannica online academic edition article on Dostoevsky by Professor Gary Saul Morson of Northwestern is slightly shorter than Misplaced Pages's, but is different in kind. It may have fewer facts but it probes the writer more coherently and deeply. Here is the entire Misplaced Pages paragraph on Dostoevsky's literary legacy: 'Some, like journalist Otto Friedrich, consider Dostoyevsky to be one of Europe's major novelists, while others like Vladimir Nabokov maintain that from a point of view of enduring art and individual genius, he is a rather mediocre writer who produced wastelands of literary platitudes.' {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Since the external publication copied Misplaced Pages rather than the reverse, please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
Additional comments
The "about this book" link claims the book was published in 1972, which is ludicrous since the works cited includes books published as late as 2005. And, for that matter, the text itself refers to a TV show in 2008. I didn't put a lot of time into this, but enough to show natural evolution. I seized on the phrase "despotic treatment", which is a striking one. That enters our article in 2006 as a major revision, here. We couldn't have copied from a book which mentions a 2008 tv show in 2006. But beyond that, we can see that some of the content that was merely modified is in the book as it was modified: " Dostoevsky below is quoted in describing the dilapidated barracks which, as he put in his own words, "should have been torn down years ago." becomes "Describing the dilapidated barracks which, as he put in his own words, "should have been torn down years ago", he wrote:" Sure enough, that's what the external source says. And speaking of that 2008 tv show, reference was added to our article here. The evidence strongly suggests that we had it first and they took it without attribution. --Moonriddengirl 11:53, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject iconGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by Stfg, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 12 April 2013.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors
Previous copyedits:
/ 
Note icon
This article was copy edited by Lfstevens on 17 March 2013.
Note icon
This article was copy edited by Cocolacoste on 13 November 2012.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fyodor Dostoevsky article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 2 months 

Frank footnotes

I decided to remove some Frank footnotes with very long page ranges. It was already pointed out at the first FAC, and I know that someone will sometime comment on that. I will use the five-volume biograph as a general reference. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 10:31, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Dostoevsky in exile

Please excuse my bad English. I want to make a comment on the caption "Dostoyevsky (left) in his cell, 1853" The signature of the image that should show Dostoevsky in Siberia, is not correct. The rationale: The premises in any way correspond to those of the Omsk camp. The clothing in no way corresponds, of those worn in the camp. The age of Dostoevsky is not the time of his exile.

The picture shows Dostoyevsky 21/22 March 1874 in the guardhouse at the Haymarket. He sat there on the arrest because he had failed as an editor for a censorship provision.

More information can be found here: http://www.dostojewski.eu/01_Vita/VITA_1873_Zensurversto%DF.html ww.dostojewski.eu

I hope I could be a little help. . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.210.164.156 (talk) 06:52, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I will correct the caption. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 07:32, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

In the grounds

What are people talking about? I cannot think of a single example where it is appropriate to say something occurred in the grounds of something else. The house was on the grounds, not in them. Ryan Vesey 21:24, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I thought it might be a British English thing, but nope Telegraph.co.uk says "Ten thousand ticket holders tucked into a royal picnic on the grounds of Buckingham Palace". Ryan Vesey 21:25, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I checked an Ngram and "on the grounds" is used much more frequently. Ryan Vesey 21:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Ahem, check the headline of that Telegraph article!
The Ngram will be skewed by the fact that "on the grounds of" is frequently used with meanings similar to "by reason of". When grounds means the land/estate of a building or institution "on the grounds of ..." rather suggests covering the whole estate, while "in the grounds of ..." can imply just one part of the estate. "on the grounds of" vs "in the grounds of" is a quite useful google search term. --Stfg (talk) 21:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
However, looking through several more articles from that Google search, it may indeed be an ENGVAR thing. (The article State funerals in the United States even manages to use both forms!) --Stfg (talk) 22:02, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Copy edit, April 2013

  • Lede: the statment that FD was devastated by his mother's death is not covered in the body and has no citation. As it is only a statement of emotion, I have edited out the devastation. --Stfg (talk) 13:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Childhood: Just checking: it says that his nannies (plural) influenced him to become religious, but only mentions one nanny (Alina Frolovna) as being an influential figure. Is this what we mean: several nannies influencing religiosity, but only one being very influential in his childhood? --Stfg (talk) 17:46, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Youth: the first paragraph needs putting in chronological order. The brothers are sent to attend the Engineering Institute in May 1837, but Fyodor doesn't enter it until January 1838 and Mikhail doesn't enter it at all, being refused admission (do we know in what month?). BTW I've removed the awkward half-sentence about the brothers being separated -- if one is in St Petersburg and the other in Estonia, then their separation is obvious ;) --Stfg (talk) 14:15, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Siberian exile: "Dostoyevsky responded to these charges by declaring that he had read the essays only "as a literary monument, neither more nor less" and argued about "personality and human egoism" rather than politics." Did Dostoyevsky argue about ..., or did he claim that the essays argued about these things? --Stfg (talk) 16:45, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
  • OK. He is mentioned only when they reach Omsk and in the caption of the execution picture. Pleshcheyev, also mentioned in the caption, is introduced properly, but the reader is left wondering who was Durov. Shall we remove mention of him, or is he significant in some way? --Stfg (talk) 14:57, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I went out on a limb and searched for Sergei Durov who is certainly significant. Here is an entry in the Great Soviet Encyclopedia. I also learned here that Dostoyevsky and Durov grew to hate eachother while in Omsk and Dostoyevsky refused to mention Durov by name or by initials in any of his writings. Unless someone beats me to it, I'll write an article on Durov this weekend. Ryan Vesey 17:38, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Release from prison: In the quote at the end of the first paragraph, the word "intensively" is strange: it should be "intensely". Please can we check the source? If it does in fact say "intensively", we should insert {{sic}} after it. --Stfg (talk) 18:34, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Marriage and honeymoon: Anna's description of FD at the end of paragraph 2: is this our translation that we can copy edit, or Sekirin's? (The wording is a little strange.) --Stfg (talk) 11:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Marriage and honeymoon: the business around Sergey Nechayev is confusingly described -- the article on him mentions 'this student movement's "Program of revolutionary activities"', which falls somewhat short of being a terrorist organization. But aren't we giving the details of this incident undue weight? How about replacing the whole "Around November 1869 ..." paragraph with:
After hearing news that the socialist revolutionary group "People's Vengeance" had murdered one of its own members on 21 November 1869, Dostoyevsky began writing Demons.
(This is adapted from the article Demons (novel)). --Stfg (talk) 11:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Last years: "The book includes his classic works, composition books, sketches, drafts, letters, autographs, and committed thoughts." Lots of questions here:
    1. What are "classic" works?
    2. Really composition books, or just noteboks?
    3. What are "committed thoughts"?
--Stfg (talk) 16:21, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Last years: The part about the haemorrhage possibly being a result of the disputes about Aleksandra Kumanina's estate is rather distracting and seems very speculative, since that was 1879 and the haemorrhage was 1881. I've put it in parentheses for now. Would it be better relegated to a footnote, do you think? --Stfg (talk) 16:21, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
  • His first wife: inconsistent spelling: Isayevna in the infobox, but Isaeva in the Release from prison section. See also the next point. --Stfg (talk) 17:31, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Liaisons: Much of the 2nd paragraph is about his relationship and marriage to Maria. A marriage is not a liaison, so this needs to be removed from here and merged into the Release from prison section, where the marriage is covered. I haven't copy edited the passage "Around this time, his first wife ... They mostly lived apart." I'll do this once the material has been merged.
  • I think that would be a big mistake, because his wives, especially Anna, are so much tied up with his career that the early sections need to cover them. The liaisons are much less significant, so they can stay here. This section currently sticks out like a sore thumb, as if a different writer had stuck it in -- it even refers to Anna differently than the rest of the article. I can fix that, but we need to move the stuff about the wives. I can do that too, if you agree. --Stfg (talk) 09:48, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I will try to move phrases about his two wives out of this section, though I would prefer to have a section about his relationships with woman.--Tomcat (7) 08:02, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
The same problem exists with the last part, about Anna Snitkina. That was not a liaison -- it should be removed from this section and anything that isn't already in the Marriage and honeymoon section needs to be noved there.
I've removed the sentence "She had remained with a Methodist pastor in the Isle of Guernsey, taking the surname "Brown", until divorcing and moving to Russia" from near the start of the last paragraph. It raises more questions than it answers, and her backstory seems irrelevant to FD.
Finally in this section, we need to clarify who Anna Dostoyevskaya is. Is she his wife, née Snitkina? --Stfg (talk) 17:31, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Clarified.--Tomcat (7) 19:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Racial: "but was not entirely comfortable with these views" is too euphemisitic. Can you provide a quotation from the source, please? --Stfg (talk) 10:59, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
  • The source is not available online. I think Frank meant that he was not agreed with his views. It goes on noting that he supported giving rights to Jews.--Tomcat (7) 11:14, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Religious: I've removed the sentence "Overall, many critics have pointed out that Dostoyevsky's religion is unusual and partially at odds with the Christian dogma" because: "Overall" is just hand-waving. "many critics" is weasel; "pointed out" is POV; "the Christian dogma"?!; it's non-specific; it's uncited. --Stfg (talk) 13:41, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I disagree with the removal, because it states that "many critics" have said that. I really can not list everyone who have stated it.--Tomcat (7) 14:55, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Also keeping a one-sentence paragraph on a random critic's meaning, Malcolm V. Jones' in this case, is very odd. That's why there was a concluded phrase.--Tomcat (7) 15:04, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Then I think you need to find at least three sources and accurately reflect what they say. At present, with weasel, OR and POV in abundance, this sentence wouldn't get through a decent GAN review, much less a FAC. We can't keep bad sentences in just to pad out one-sentence paragraphs. --Stfg (talk) 15:24, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
  • If it were clear, you wouldn't need to say it, would you. But I think the whole idea is very problematic. What, after all, is "unusual"? Suppose I challenge you by saying that I find all his views, insofar as they are described in the article, to be completely normal. What then? Your only recourse would be to produce sources. Or to put it another way, which version of "the Christian dogma" was he "partially at odds" with? Or to put it yet another way, why is that sentence not mere editorializing, with the "many critics" as an appeal to (unidentified) authority? --Stfg (talk) 20:08, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
  • His beliefs were overall orthodox, except his views of salvation, which were identified as unorthodox (for evangelicals), as he meant that Christ has suffered for our sins (and not that we suffer from our sins, as is declared by the NT). See for a comprehensive account of his beliefs.--Tomcat (7) 11:14, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
(←) That is a very interesting source, and it might be possible to make some use of it. However, let's look quite carefully. The first conlusion is: "His presentation of God, Christ, and sin are generally aligned with the theological thought of Christian orthodoxy." Thus, orthodoxy is the overall picture. However the next is (my bolding): "Sadly, however, his crystallizations that relate to the subject of salvation in his novels often appear defective." It is his "crystallizations" in novels that we see, which is not quite the same as his belief per se. Now, you've misread the next part: "Do we suffer for our sins, or (as the NT declares) has Christ sufficiently suffered for our sins (Heb 9:26-28; 1 Pet 2:21-24; 3:18)? Dostoevsky almost seemed to embrace an in-this-life purgatory. Suffering here on earth is purgative, regenerative for him, which does not square with NT teaching." This says that the NT says that Christ suffered for our sins while Dostoyevsky was on about "an in-this-life purgatory", not the other way round. In this, FD was certainly unorthodox (or the characters in his novels were, which possibly isn't exactly the same thing). I would say that this source rather presents FD as a rather orthodox Christian who diverged (if his characters signify this) on whether suffering on earth atones for our sins. (A rather common view, by the way.) Surely no more of a maverick than this. --Stfg (talk) 11:57, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I've put something in there now. What do you think? --Stfg (talk) 13:12, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Looks good--Tomcat (7) 08:02, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Notes from Underground: "At the same time, he takes his aggression out on lower-class people: he presents himself as a possible saviour to the poor prostitute Lisa, advising her to reject self-reproach when she looks to him for hope." The colon implies that the second half amplifies the first. But it's a non-sequitur -- encouraging her isn't taking his aggression out on her. --Stfg (talk) 15:12, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
  • It wouldn't really help. The problem is that the words "he takes his aggression out on lower-class people" set up an expectation that we'll be told how he takes it out on them. Regardless of puncuation, the following statement doesn't answer that question. --Stfg (talk) 11:27, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
  • "self-created circle" isn't any clearer than "self-created society" -- perhaps even more confusing. The problem is that it appears to speak of circles/societies that create themselves, but how can abstractions create themselves? --Stfg (talk) 11:27, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Help requested

Does any of the 359 watchers of this article have access to Goldstein, David. Dostoevsky and the Jews. University of Texas Press. ISBN 978-0-292-71528-8, please? If so, please could you help with a quotation from its foreword relevant to the question under Racial in the section above. Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 14:09, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

My library has it. I should be able to pick it up tomorrow or possibly later today. Ryan Vesey 17:28, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. If you are at it, could you write down the titles of some unreleased works by Dostoyevsky in the Appendix chapter of Dostoevsky: His Life and Works. I have only the Russian version, and the English online version does not show some pages. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 09:46, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Unfortunately Ryan hasn't been able to access a copy. Anyone else, please? --Stfg (talk) 08:36, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Notable works

I think there are too many works listed in the infobox:

  1. Notes from Underground
  2. Crime and Punishment
  3. The Idiot
  4. Demons
  5. The Brothers Karamazov
  6. The House of the Dead
  7. The Gambler
  8. A Gentle Creature
  9. The Dream of a Ridiculous Man
  10. White Nights

I suggest keeping the first five because they are often cited as Dostoyevsky's best works. Nr. 6 and 7 are medium works, and his short stories are not outstanding. Poor Folk, while not very famous, should be included in my opinion (very successful in Russia, received many praises). --Tomcat (7) 09:16, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

I would keep 6 and 7, which are quite well known, but I agree with removing the short stories and including Poor Folk. Removing the short stories incidentally removes an error, because the italic styling affects them too. --Stfg (talk) 10:21, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Legacy section - draft

I think that section is too clunky. I propose a more structured version:

Extended content
== Legacy ==

Reception and influence

Dostoyevsky monument in Dresden

Together with Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky is often regarded as one of the greatest and most influential novelists of the Golden Age of Russian literature. Albert Einstein put him above the mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss, calling him a "great religious writer" who explores "the mystery of spiritual existence". Friedrich Nietzsche called Dostoyevsky "the only psychologist ... from whom I had something to learn; he ranks among the most beautiful strokes of fortune in my life". Hermann Hesse enjoyed Dostoyevsky's work and cautioned that to read him is like a "glimpse into the havoc". The Norwegian novelist Knut Hamsun wrote that "no one has analysed the complicated human structure as Dostoyevsky. His psychologic sense is overwhelming and visionary."

In his posthumous collection of sketches A Moveable Feast, Ernest Hemingway stated that in Dostoevsky "there were things believable and not to be believed, but some so true that they changed you as you read them; frailty and madness, wickedness and saintliness, and the insanity of gambling were there to know". James Joyce praised Dostoyevsky's prose: "... he is the man more than any other who has created modern prose, and intensified it to its present-day pitch. It was his explosive power which shattered the Victorian novel with its simpering maidens and ordered commonplaces; books which were without imagination or violence." In her essay The Russian Point of View, Virginia Woolf said, "Out of Shakespeare there is no more exciting reading". Franz Kafka called Dostoyevsky his "blood-relative" and was heavily influenced by his works, particularly The Brothers Karamazov and Crime and Punishment, both of which profoundly influenced The Trial. Sigmund Freud called The Brothers Karamazov "the most significant novel ever written". Modern cultural movements such as the surrealists, the existentialists and the Beats cite Dostoyevsky as an influence, and he is cited as the forerunner of Russian symbolism, existentialism, expressionism and psychoanalysis.

Soviet Union stamp, 1971

Honours

In 1956 an olive-green postage stamp dedicated to Dostoyevsky was released in the Soviet Union, with a print run of 1,000 copies. A Dostoevsky Museum was opened on 12 November 1971 in the apartment where he wrote his first and final novels. A mercury crater was named after him in 1979. A minor planet discovered in 1981 by Lyudmila Karachkina was named 3453 Dostoevsky. Music critic and broadcaster Artemy Troitsky hosts the radio show "FM Достоевский" since 1997. J.M. Coetzee wrote the 1997 novel The Master of Petersburg, featuring Dostoyevsky as the protagonist. Viewers of the TV show Name of Russia voted him the ninth greatest Russian of all time, behind chemist Dmitry Mendeleev and ahead of ruler Ivan IV. Vladimir Khotinenko directed an Eagle Award-winning TV series about Dostoyevsky's life, and was screened one year later in 2011.

Numerous memorials were inaugurated in cities and regions such as Moscow, St. Petersburg, Novosibirsk, Omsk, Semipalatinsk, Kusnetsk, Darovoye, Staraya Russa, Lyublino, Tallinn, Dresden, Baden-Baden and Wiesbaden. Two metro stations were opened in St. Petersburg and Moscow, first on 30 December 1991. The latter was opened on 19 June 2010, the 75th anniversary of the Moscow Metro, and is decorated with murals by artist Ivan Nikolaev depicting scenes from Dostoyevsky's works, such as controversial suicides.

Criticism

Dostoyevsky's work did not always gain a positive reception. Several critics, such as Nikolay Dobrolyubov, Ivan Bunin and Vladimir Nabokov, viewed his writing as excessively psychological and philosophical rather than artistic. Others found fault with chaotic and disorganised plots, and others, like Turgenev, objected to "excessive psychologising" and too-detailed naturalism. His style was deemed "prolix, repetitious and lacking in polish, balance, restraint and good taste". Saltykov-Shchedrin, Tolstoy, Nikolay Mikhaylovsky and others criticised his puppet-like characters, most prominently in The Idiot, The Possessed and The Brothers Karamazov. These characters were compared to those of Hoffmann, an author whom Dostoyevsky admired.

Basing his estimation on stated criteria of enduring art and individual genius, Nabokov judges Dostoyevsky "not a great writer, but rather a mediocre one—with flashes of excellent humour but, alas, with wastelands of literary platitudes in between". Nabokov complains that the novels are peopled by "neurotics and lunatics" and states that Dostoyevsky's characters do not develop: "We get them all complete at the beginning of the tale and so they remain." He finds the novels full of contrived "surprises and complications of plot", which are effective when first read, but on second reading, without the shock and benefit of these surprises, appear loaded with "glorified cliché".

Reputation

A scene from the 1935 film Crime and Punishment

Dostoyevsky's books have been translated into more than 170 languages and have sold around 15 million copies. The German translator Wilhelm Wolfsohn published one of the first translations, parts of Poor Folk, in an 1846–1847 magazine, and a French translation followed. French, German and Italian translations usually came directly from the original, while English translations were second-hand and of poor quality. The first English translations were by Marie von Thilo in 1881, but the first highly regarded ones were produced between 1912 and 1920 by Constance Garnett. Her flowing and easy translations helped popularize Dostoyevsky's novels in anglophone countries, and Bakthin's Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics (1929) provided further understanding of his style.

Dostoyevsky's works were interpreted in film and on stage in many different countries. Princess Varvara Dmitrevna Obolenskaya was among the first to propose staging Crime and Punishment. Dostoyevsky did not refuse permission, but he advised against it, as he believed that "each art corresponds to a series of poetic thoughts, so that one idea cannot be expressed in another non-corresponding form". His extensive explanations in opposition to the transposition of his works into other media were groundbreaking in fidelity criticism. He thought that just one episode should be dramatised, or an idea should be taken and incorporated into a separate plot. According to critic Alexander Burry, some of the most effective adaptions are Sergei Prokofiev's opera The Gambler, Leoš Janáček's opera From the House of the Dead, Akira Kurosawa's film The Idiot and Andrzej Wajda's film The Possessed.

After the 1917 Russian Revolution, Dostoyevsky's books were often censored or banned. His philosophy, particularly in Demons, was deemed capitalist and anti-Communist, leading Maxim Gorky to dub the author "our evil genius". Reading Dostoyevsky was forbidden, and those caught doing so were imprisoned. During the Second World War, however, his works were used as propaganda by both the Soviets and the Nazis, and after the war the Soviet prohibition was overturned. Although the 125th anniversary of his birth was celebrated throughout Russia in 1947, his works were banned again until Nikita Khrushchev's accession to power ten years later, following de-Stalinization and a softening of repressive laws.

I would also add a picture from the Gambler opera. What do you think?--Tomcat (7) 10:58, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I think that's a very good idea, and have boldly copied it into the article and copy edited it. One point for future reference: please be aware of WP:LINKCLARITY. Links like ] make the reader think they are being offered a link to Moscow. Do add a picture from the Gambler opera -- it's a good idea. --Stfg (talk) 12:55, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
I have found only pictures of modern plays, and they are likely copyrighted. How about something like File:Tala Birell-Douglass Dumbrille in Crime and Punishment.jpg or File:Saawariya's set.jpg? These are the only freely licensed pictures about one of Dostoyevsky's works. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 10:43, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
I added the first picture. I think it looks pretty good.--Tomcat (7) 11:59, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I think so too. --Stfg (talk) 12:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
I've received a DPL bot warning that the link to Lyublino (in the Honours section) is to a disambiguation page. Tomcat, please could you disambiguate it -- I don't know which Lyublino you were referring to. Cheers, --Stfg (talk) 12:22, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Influenced section of infobox

To try to avoid this becoming an edit war, I suggest that everyone interested might like to state their reasons here. The question is: what are the arguments in favour of retention or deletion of the Influenced section in the infobox? --Stfg (talk) 23:41, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Why should there not be an "influenced" section? It is well known that Dostoyevsky influenced a number of significant writers, psychologists and philosophers. There is no lack of sources to indicate this. His wide-ranging influence is an important aspect of his notability as a writer and observer of the human psyche. The section gives a brief indication of this wide-ranging influence. I notice that, before the whole section was removed, Kerouac was removed because he "belongs to the beat movement". I'm not sure if it is true that Kerouac "belongs" to the beat movement, but why is it a reason for him not to have been influenced by Dostoyevsky? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.239.254.173 (talk) 04:38, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
The problem is that it is not known if they were really influenced by his works or just enjoyed reading him. Another problem is how many and which people should be mentioned. I just searched for high-quality literature biographies with infoboxes (Honoré de Balzac, Ian Fleming, Ernest Hemingway, Edgar Allan Poe, Rabindranath Tagore), none of which include that parameter. I don't dislike adding some names, but others will probably. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 09:58, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Mariinsky Hospital

I am going to change File:Wki Dostoyevsky Street 2 Moscow Mariinsky Hospital.jpg as it seems people will continuously complain about its copyright status, and whether de minimis applies. I would add two portraits of his parents because they are more important than his place of birth (additionally that picture is not from the 19th century...) Regards.--Tomcat (7) 10:01, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Good idea. And those are nice pictures. --Stfg (talk) 11:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Trying to avoid a brewing edit war

Through my involvement at Misplaced Pages talk:Good article nominations#Review_shopping at has come to my attention that Tomcat7 (talk · contribs) has a long history on wikipedia of doing whatever he wants regardless of the opinions of others. We held a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Novels#Derivative_works_and_cultural_references_templates regarding a disagreement over whether navbox templates for individual works should be on the authors' pages. I felt they should, but Tomcat7, who feels they shouldn't has been removing them. 4 people (Sadads (talk · contribs), GimliDotNet (talk · contribs), Edokter (talk · contribs), and Kuralyov (talk · contribs)) voiced opinions in favor of keeping them on the pages, 2 people (Deor (talk · contribs) and Truthkeeper88 (talk · contribs)) voiced opinions in favor of removing them from the pages and one person (Drmies (talk · contribs)) supported a case-by-case analysis of inclusion on each page. Given that we are not dealing with controversial content and WP:BLP issues, there needs to be consensus to not WP:PRESERVE content, be it prose, images, templates, tables or whatever. There was no consensus to remove the content and if a consensus of any kind existed, it was to PRESERVE the content at issue. Nonetheless, after these discussion responses came in, Tomcat7 saw fit to disregard the opinions of others again. I am restoring the content. If Tomcat7 insists on disregarding the opinions of others again and removes the content, I will initiate a discussion on his long history of behavior at either WP:AN or WP:ANI.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:08, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

  1. Lauer 2000, p. 364. sfn error: no target: CITEREFLauer2000 (help)
  2. Vucinich, Alexander (2001). Einstein and Soviet Ideology. Stanford University Press. p. 181. ISBN 0-8047-4209-X.
  3. Müller 1982, p. 7. sfn error: no target: CITEREFMüller1982 (help)
  4. Müller 1982, p. 8. sfn error: no target: CITEREFMüller1982 (help)
  5. Lavrin 1947, p. 161. sfn error: no target: CITEREFLavrin1947 (help)
  6. Dahiya, Bhim S. (1992). Hemingway's A Farewell To Arms: a Critical Study. Academic Foundation. p. 15. ISBN 978-81-269-0772-4.
  7. Power, Arthur; Joyce, James. Conversations with James Joyce. University of Toronto. pp. 51–60. ISBN 978-1-901866-41-4.
  8. Woolf, Virginia. "Chapter 16: The Russian Point of View". The Common Reader. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. ISBN 978-0-15-602778-6.
  9. Bridgwater, Patrick (2003). Kafka: Gothic and Fairytale. Rodopi. p. 9. ISBN 978-90-420-1194-6.
  10. Struc, Roman S. "Kafka and Dostoevsky as 'Blood Relatives'". University of Toronto. Retrieved 8 June 2012.
  11. Rieff, Philip (1979). Freud, the Mind of the Moralist (3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press. p. 132. ISBN 978-0-226-71639-8.
  12. Bloshteyn 2007, p. 5. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBloshteyn2007 (help)
  13. Lavrin2 2005, p. 38. sfn error: no target: CITEREFLavrin22005 (help)
  14. Bloom 2004, p. 108. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBloom2004 (help)
  15. Burry 2011, p. 57. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBurry2011 (help)
  16. Breger 2008, p. 270. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBreger2008 (help)
  17. "USSR (Soviet Union) Postage – Stamps: 1956–1960". CPA – "Souzpechat" Central Philatelic Agency. Retrieved 10 May 2012.
  18. "Museum". Fyodor Dostoevsky Literary Memorial Museum. Retrieved 10 May 2012.
  19. "Радио ФИНАМ ФМ 99.6" (in Russian). ФИНАМ. Retrieved 20 April 2013.
  20. "Результаты Интернет голосования" (in Russian). Name of Russia. Retrieved 15 May 2012. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (|trans-title= suggested) (help)
  21. "Liublinsko-Dmitrovskaya Line". Moscow Metro. Retrieved 10 May 2012.
  22. "Opening delayed for Moscow metro's "station of suicides"". Russia Today. TV-Novosti. 15 May 2010. Retrieved 10 May 2012.
  23. Terras 1998, pp. 3–4. sfn error: no target: CITEREFTerras1998 (help)
  24. Nabokov, Vladamir (1981). Lectures on Russian Literature. Harvest Book/Harcourt. pp. 97–135. ISBN 0-15-602776-3.
  25. Kjetsaa 1989, p. foreword. sfn error: no target: CITEREFKjetsaa1989 (help)
  26. Meier-Gräfe 1988, p. 492. sfn error: no target: CITEREFMeier-Gräfe1988 (help)
  27. Bloshteyn 2007, p. 26. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBloshteyn2007 (help)
  28. Jones & Terry 2010, p. 216. sfn error: no target: CITEREFJonesTerry2010 (help)
  29. France, Peter (2001). The Oxford Guide to Literature in English Translation. Oxford University Press. pp. 594–8. ISBN 0-19-818359-3.
  30. Burry 2011, p. 3. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBurry2011 (help)
  31. Burry 2011, p. 5. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBurry2011 (help)
  32. Bloshteyn 2007, pp. 7–8. sfn error: no target: CITEREFBloshteyn2007 (help)
Categories: