Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:55, 18 September 2012

	Pilgrim at Tinker Creek is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 17, 2012.
Article milestones Date Process Result December 8, 2011 Good article nominee Listed February 26, 2012 Peer review Reviewed March 24, 2012 Featured article candidate Promoted A fact from this article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 11, 2011.The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Pulitzer Prize-winning book Pilgrim at Tinker Creek is often compared to Walden, a work on which author Annie Dillard (pictured) based her master's thesis? Current status: Featured article

Books FA‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Virginia FA‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia 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.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pilgrim at Tinker Creek/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Drmies (talk · contribs) 15:53, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Preliminary remarks: I had a quick look at the article and made a few minor edits. I think this will be fine, but I may do this in a couple of sessions, so bear with me. Sometimes Real Life really gets in the way of things.

No worries. I wasn't expecting a review so quickly, so thanks! Take your time. :) María (yllosubmarine) 16:03, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Notes

I'm using this to make some remarks--not random ones, perhaps, but less organized than they should be. You'll note that some of this indicates what you might think of as a pet peeve: coverage in journal articles. There's only one in the bibliography right now, and for a librarian they're easy picking.

Coverage

I think the coverage could be a bit broader. I'm browsing through the MLA and JSTOR, and there is ample indication that the genre-section could do with a paragraph on Pilgrim as ecopoetics (I just made that a redirect to a terribly underdeveloped article--Maria, get on it!). For instance:

• Mazel, David: "Annie Dillard and the Book of Job: Notes toward a Postnatural Ecocriticism" In (pp. 185-95) Ingram, Annie Merrill (ed. and introd.); Marshall, Ian (ed. and introd.); Philippon, Daniel J. (ed. and introd.); Sweeting, Adam W. (ed. and introd.), Coming into Contact: Explorations in Ecocritical Theory and Practice. Athens, GA: U of Georgia P, 2007. ix, 278 pp.. (2007)
  • Can't access this right now, and I am listing this not just because I'm fascinated by the role of Job in American literary culture.
• Killingsworth, M. Jimmie: "The Case of Cotton Mather's Dog: Reflection and Resonance in American Ecopoetics" College English, (73:5), 2011 May, 498-517. (2011)
  • Contains a (brief) note on Pilgrim and Walden, and could be of use to sketch the context of American ecopoetry in which Dillard produced Pilgrim
• Dockins, Mike: "Stalking the Bumblebee: An Exploration of 'Cruelty' in Pilgrim at Tinker Creek" Massachusetts Review: A Quarterly of Literature, the Arts and Public Affairs, (44:4), 2003-2004 Winter, 636-48. (2003)
  • I skimmed this and it might well add an easy paragraph to the themes-section, on cruelty (or some such term)--or with the following essay it might form a paragraph on estrangement from nature (some OR here: our repulsion to what we call nature's cruelty and our efforts to pretend we are no longer cruel is an estrangement, methinks):
• Kraus, Carolyn Wells: "On Hurting People's Feelings: Journalism, Guilt, and Autobiography" Biography: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly, (26:2), 2003 Spring, 283-97 (English summary.). (2003)
• Legler, Gretchen: "'I Am a Transparent Eyeball': The Politics of Vision in American Nature Writing" In (pp. 243-50) Tallmadge, John (ed. and introd.); Harrington, Henry (ed. and introd.), Reading under the Sign of Nature: New Essays in Ecocriticism. Salt Lake City, UT: U of Utah P, 2000. xv, 368 pp.. (2000)
  • Here's another one for the eco-thing, and dropping Emerson in such an article is always a good thing.
• Mendelson, Donna: "Tinker Creek and the Waters of Walden: Thoreauvian Currents in Annie Dillard's Pilgrim" The Concord Saunterer, (3), 1995 Fall, 50-62. (1995)
• Papa, James A., Jr.: "Water-Signs: Place and Metaphor in Dillard and Thoreau" In (pp. 70-79) Schneider, Richard J. (ed. and introd.); Buell, Lawrence (foreword), Thoreau's Sense of Place: Essays in American Environmental Writing. Iowa City, IA: U of Iowa P, 2000. x, 310 pp.. (Iowa City, IA: American Land and Life Series). (2000)
  • For beefing up the Thoreau comment in the second paragraph of the Style and genre section.
• Radaker, Kevin: "Caribou, Electrons, and the Angel: Stalking the Sacred in Annie Dillard's Pilgrim at Tinker Creek". Christianity and Literature, (46:2), 1997 Winter, 123-43. (1997)
  • Can you get this easily? Looks very interesting, considering the note on theodicy.

OK, that's enough for now. I'm not providing a list of things that should be incorporated; I'm doing this first to see what the coverage is among the critics and how the article measures up, and second to make a few suggestions for broadening. I think the coverage is probably enough for GA, but I'm not done with my library search. Considering your list of FAs, you might as well look ahead with this one! Now back to life. Drmies (talk) 16:54, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, and spot-on source suggestions. I do have access to both JSTOR and MLA, so I was planning on doing more research over the next week or so -- I even have several of these (Mazel and Mendelson) printed out and ready to use! I didn't expect a review so quickly, but I'm really glad for the extra push in the right direction. I think the article is "broad" in its coverage, but not entirely complete; I typically use the space between GA and PR to complete research by hunting through online databases, but now's as good a time as any. I'll see what I can add over the next couple days, and then get back to you. How does that sound? P.S.: I took an ecopoetry class in grad school. That article is just... *shudder* María (yllosubmarine) 17:13, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

That sounds great. I'm glad you're taking this exactly in the spirit in which I intended it: I am not trying to draw up a laundry list of must-dos. Something else came to me just now (I have my best ideas in the shower...): in the Reception section I'd like to see a note on just how important this book is for later 'eco-writers'. Some verified namedropping would already help. I'm thinking for instance of that all-important book by Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, and more recently Sandra Steingraber's Living Downstream--if I had to take a guess, I'd say that Dillard's book is of similar importance for ecopoets and ecofiction writers. Again, just a couple of lines will do--and in the upcoming FA that would be a paragraph or two, if indeed my guess is correct.

Good luck with the work, let me know if I can help, and thanks for your contributions, even if the Foundation thinks this trivial, haha. Drmies (talk) 17:40, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

OMG, this article only gets 40 hits a day! Why am I even bothering?! Seriously though, it's one of my favorites, so I'm just glad I finally got around to improving its Wiki coverage; and I'm very glad you're reviewing, since we seem to be on the same page. I definitely agree that some namedropping would be beneficial, so I'll be on the lookout for anything of that kind. I also know there are some less than positive reviews out there, since not everyone is a fan. I've got another article that is heading to PR-then-FAC before this one, so no rush on this. I'll report back soon! María (yllosubmarine) 21:38, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Okay, here is my progress over the last few days: six additional journal article sources, and plumped up Style/Genre and Themes sections. I haven't had much luck in finding soundbites for the Legacy section, but there are still some rocks to be turned over. What do you think? María (yllosubmarine) 18:11, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

• Well, I think you have done an excellent job. A few remarks:
  • The lead says "the book's story takes place over the period of one year." Now, I understand it's a narrative book, but that's not exactly the same as story--perhaps "narrative" is the better word here. Or I'm picking lint.
    • "narrative" sounds good, changed. María (yllosubmarine) 16:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
  • In the lead, "although several of its chapters have been anthologized in magazines and other publications". The phrase is repeated later. Here's my question: if they "had been anthologized" before the book's publication, the "although" is warranted. But I guess that they weren't, so the implication that later, separate publication lessens the idea of a single sustained narrative isn't really relevant. If the sentence is recast, "Dillard considers it..." preceding "although several of its chapters...", that implication is already less strong and the statement more factual than suggestive.
    • Reworded. María (yllosubmarine) 16:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
  • In "Summary", the second paragraph seems a bit out of place--why a long quote from the first section without a reason for citing it, and without citing anything else? A return to those statements from a reading of the last section might give a nice circular motif, which suggests progression and can support the idea of narrative.
    • I initially attended the quote to be a blockquote, but changed my mind at some point; it's back to being a blockquote so it introduces the summary (which still may be expanded). María (yllosubmarine) 16:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
  • The bibliography lists the 1999 edition, and mention is made of the "Harper Perennial Modern Classics edition". If that is the 1999 edition, add the year to the phrase.
    • Done. María (yllosubmarine) 16:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
  • "it has been anthologized in over thirty collections"--"it" is unclear, since you had mentioned individual chapters having been anthologized. Rephrase.
    • Done. María (yllosubmarine) 16:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
  • That she was 29 when she received the Pulitzer does not strike me as very relevant. What would be nice is a quote from the jury report or something like that, something that imparts some estimation of value and judgment.
    • To be fair, 29 is rather young to win a Pulitzer -- but I see what you mean. I've added a soundbite from The Pulitzer Prize Archive, which gives the jury's nomination statement. Very good suggestion, thanks María (yllosubmarine) 16:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again for your good work--addressing these issues will ensure speedy promotion, as far as I'm concerned. Drmies (talk) 15:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

All done! María (yllosubmarine) 16:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

• I think we're finished here. Congrats! Drmies (talk) 16:15, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Maddocks' review

Summarizing Melvin Maddocks' comments as noting "a misleading undertone" is a bit facile. To me, his comments are describing a subtle, but conscious effort by Dillard to influence the reader. Dillard may be downplaying her intentions, but I don't think Maddocks is seriously trying to say that the book is "misleading". Kaldari (talk) 05:41, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps not "misleading", but something along those lines? Maddocks' point seems to be that he finds the book's message to be at odds with Dillard's life and persona. Here's a couple more clips from the review: "At first she seems to fit into a pattern as predictable as a wildlife calendar, this Annie Dillard, the sensitive young woman with folded hands on the dust jacket, who looks out of her cottage window on nature and, sure enough, starting right on schedule with January, records the seasons as they come and go at Tinker Creek in Virginia .... The author compares her life with that of an anchorite hermit. In fact, she is anything but a hairshirt recluse. She smokes cigarettes. She drives a car. Like nature, she is sometimes guilty of repetition and a certain atrocious lushness". María (yllosubmarine) 12:41, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Why can't I edit?

Wanted to sort bibliography: Marshall after Maddocks, and Parrish after Papa. 69.111.140.26 (talk) 23:09, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for mentioning. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:41, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Infobox

Earlier today, I added an infobox to this article. It was removed with the edit summary:

rm infobox as completely unnecessary; all pertinent information can be located in the lead section

not only is that factually incorrect, but the purpose of infoboxes is to gather and repeat such information, to present it to our readers in a standardised (literally, templated) format, and then to emit it as metadata. That is not unnecessary, let alone completely unnecessary. The infobox should be restored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages featured articles
• Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
• Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
• Old requests for peer review
• Misplaced Pages Did you know articles that are featured articles
• FA-Class Book articles
• WikiProject Books articles
• FA-Class Virginia articles
• Unknown-importance Virginia articles
• WikiProject Virginia articles