Jump to content

Talk:Paul Bowles

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Paul Bowles/Comments)

Non-neutral and Poorly Formatted Info in Introduction

[edit]

Hello, I am not a wikipedia editor and was just reading about authors, but noticed some very poorly formatted information focused on Bowles's alleged racism in the introduction section of this article. I attempted to revert to the last neutral version of the article and the editor rebuffed this change. I do not care whether the information is included in the article either way, but it certainly needs to be correctly formatted and probably in its own section. It also needs academic sources. I would strongly prefer a seasoned wikipedian take over this issue, as I do not know the norms here but am disturbed by such edits going unremarked on.

Sincerely 76.14.54.85 (talk) 06:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this to attention. I've removed the offending text for now. At the very least, these sorts of matters should be canvassed within the body of the article, and a summary thereof might qualify for mention in the lede. But they should not be mentioned solely in the lede. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 07:33, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bowles didn't even say the things the anon is alleging - if you read the New York Review piece linked, you'll see that was a combination of Truman Capote and William Burroughs. Anyway I removed it again and blocked the anon for edit warring. It's completely inappropriate to have shouty outrage, sloppily sourced, in the lede - or anywhere else. Antandrus (talk) 18:13, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article issues and classification

[edit]
Reassess the article to C-class. Fails the B-class criteria
Categories:
  • Articles with unsourced statements from April 2016
  • Articles with unsourced statements from April 2022
  • Articles needing additional references from April 2022
  • Articles with unsourced statements from January 2023
  • Articles with unsourced statements from May 2023
  • Articles lacking reliable references from July 2024 -- Otr500 (talk) 09:05, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
While not the most egregious, this ranks up in the list.
Some things just grow during incremental edits and sometimes get out of hand. The "External links" section, one of the optional appendices, was expanded to 22 entries, organized into six subsections. Three seems to be an acceptable number, and of course, everyone has their favorite to try to add for a fourth. Consensus needs to determine this. A tag indicates concerns.
However, none is needed for article promotion.
Some links may be included in WP:ELNO, or What Wikipedia is not (policy) such as WP:NOTREPOSITORY or WP:NOTGUIDE.
  • WP:ELDEAD may apply.
  • In some cases ELCITE applies: Do not use {{cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section. Others, listed below:
  • ELpoints #3) states: Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
  • LINKFARM states: There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
  • ELMIN: Minimize the number of links.
The External links guideline This page in a nutshell: External links in an article can be helpful to the reader, but they should be kept minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article. With rare exceptions, external links should not be used in the body of an article.
Second paragraph, acceptable external links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy.
    • Please also note:
  • WP:ELBURDEN: Disputed links should be excluded by default unless and until there is a consensus to include them. Please do not add back more links without consensus. Simple solution to facilitate career maintenance tag. Move links here for discussion.
Moved links:

Archives

[edit]

Exhibitions

[edit]
[edit]

Interviews

[edit]

More interviews on the official Paul Bowles website

  • Bailey, Jeffrey (Fall 1981). "Paul Bowles, The Art of Fiction No. 67". The Paris Review. Fall 1981 (81).
  • "A Distant Episode: In Tangier with Paul Bowles", Poets & Writers Magazine, pp. 36–39, July–August 1999, archived from the original on May 1, 2011, retrieved April 13, 2010
  • Clips of interviews with Bowles from the documentary Paul Bowles in Morocco
  • "Paul Bowles, A Conversation with Bruce Duffie" (Bruce Duffie, May 1992)
  • Paul Bowles (January 1, 1998). "Paul Bowles meets with Ken Smith and Frank J. Oteri". NewMusicBox (Interview) (published December 1, 1999).
  • "Stranger on a Strange Shore" (Gaither Stewart, Critique magazine, October 2000).

Assessments

[edit]

Reviews and obituaries

[edit]