# Talk:Jones Very

I really appreciate how well-cited this article is. It seems, to me, a great example of a solid Wikipedia entry. --66.30.117.67 (talk) 00:49, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! It took a lot of work to get it to this point - serious discussions of Very's life and work are hard to come by. Even with all the scouring I did, the last few years of his life (really, the last couple decades) are virtually unexplored in this article. I hope to find more some day! --Midnightdreary (talk) 01:19, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
I'd endorse a GA nomination as well if the "Critical assessment" section didn't end with Channing, Dana and Griswold. Aren't there any more recent voices? --Janneman (talk) 18:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC) Uh, it's got GA already, well, for the upcoming FA nomination then. --Janneman (talk) 18:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I added a paragraph, largely as a response to User Janneman's remark above, on the reassessment of Very initiated by Yvor Winters and William Irving Bartlett in the last century.Tristan noir (talk) 03:31, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks good at first glance. Thanks so much for adding it. --Midnightdreary (talk) 04:38, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Midnightdreary. The Deese introduction offers a broad overview of Very’s modern reception from Winters & Bartlett until the date of publication (1993), particularly pp xxxviii-xlv. I was hesitant to include more but you may wish to review Deese in order to determine if more detail is justified. This article is balanced and well-sourced; I see from the edit history that you've devoted much labor to it. Congratulations. I wonder only if addition of a Very sonnet might be justified?  “The Hand and Foot,” if so, might be representative.Tristan noir (talk) 05:56, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Well, we shouldn't make judgment calls on what constitutes representative work here (that violates NPOV and OR policies), and we don't usually include that stuff here anyway. But Wikisource is a sister project that collects public domain or works which are otherwise copyright free. It would be nice to have a full page for Very's works there. --Midnightdreary (talk) 03:25, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
I see your point. "Sample" might have been a better choice of words than "representative." I've seen quotations of a poet's work on other pages (see Robert Bridges, for example). For that reason, I believed the practice acceptable as long as presentation was neutral and the example was selected from work in the public domain as is Very's. It's a minor point, anyway, and the absence of a sample doesn't detract from what is a good article.Tristan noir (talk) 04:11, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jones Very. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070421201111/http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/poets/very.php to http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/poets/very.php
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: 5 June 2024).

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) 00:42, 27 April 2017 (UTC)