Talk:Sylvia Plath/Archive 1

message: Has anyone been to http://www.biblio.com/authors/559/Sylvia_Plath_Biography.html where both the Wikipedia article and Biblio one are very similar word for word?
: I had noticed that, yeah...Luceo 18:04, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright? 

message: Is the self portrait the best picture avaliable? Surely there are some better images in the public domain that can be used?
DustinG 13:38, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: intriguing is not informative. the article deserves better. Joeyramoney 02:13, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

text: agreed, there has to be an actual picture we could use Oreo man 20:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm for keeping the picture and I see these comments are about a year old now... Snecklifter 21:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Self portrait

message: I don't know for sure, but everywhere else I've looked on the web has said that Sylvia Plath was born in Jamacia Heights, Pennsylvanina, and not Boston. Can someone check this and somehow get the info to the webmaster? I can't figure out how to contact him/her. -K.E. 
:I think you might've missed the point a little bit here... this is a wiki. This means that anyone can edit any page. There is no webmaster to contact. Just click the "edit this page" link at the top of the page, and there you go. Hbackman 00:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth place

message: The Boston link could do with updating to point to the appropriate Boston article, but I'm not sure which it is. --John 23:24, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Boston link

message: I've removed what looks like a school or college essay on the poem "Cut", which was inserted today.  It doesn't fit into the article, as it stands.  Something more encyclopaedic about images of depression in Plath's poetry might be appropriate, but remember Wikipedia:No original research - this isn't the place for individuals to put forward their own response to the poetry or theories about it.  --  ajn</span> (talk) 12:40, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cut 

message: How can this article not mention Sylvia Plath's bipolar disorder? It's a bit like writing an article about Malcolm X without mentioning that he was black. Plath's poems document her bipolar disorder in the clearest possible way, and The Bell Jar is a clear roman à clef. -- Karada 02:46, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm with AMS on this one. Her poems definitely suggest a struggle with some form of psychological depression, but there's ongoing debate as to its nature; i.e. its exogenous/endogenous origins, whether she had bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, etc. Similarly, The Bell Jar doesn't irrefutably point toward the conclusion that Plath had bipolar disorder.Luceo 17:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bipolar disorder

message: "Her father, Otto, a college professor and noted authority on the subject of bees, died of an embolism following surgery(complications from undiagnosed diabetes) Wagner-Martin around the same time, on October 5, 1940."  This sentence makes no sense as written.  I don't know what it's actually supposed to say, so I can't edit it in good conscience.  Who was Wagner-Martin?  Would someone with more knowledge on the subject fix this? --Andrew 02:34, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  confusing sentence 

message: An anon recently changed the date of Plath's father's death to November 5, 1940 from October 5, 1940. I'm going to assume that the change was incorrect since that was the only edit from that IP and revert it, but if I'm wrong someone please change it back. Thanks. Hbackman 22:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just checked my copy of The Unabridged Journals of Sylvia Plath.  It is indeed November 5. I'll change it back. Hbdragon88 03:59, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of father's death? 

message: Not sure if it should be of note to this particlar article, but could someone please answer a question of mine about her accent. I've heard some interviews/readings of her and I know that she spent her later years in England, but I cannot understand why her accent is as Southern English as it is. Was the American accent so English back in the 1950s? Or was just because Plath was so self-admittedly conservative (she claimed in a BBC interview that she always identified with America 50 years out of date) and may have adopted a more archaic dialect? I know this sounds kind of petty, but it's strange to read about an American poet who really doesn't sound it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.253.157 (talk) 20:47, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well she did hail from Massachussets - where accents would be considerably closer to the British than if she, say, was from Atlanta. Also, with the ear for dialogue any good writer needs, she may have been more likely to pick up accents. --Bruiseviolet (talk) 02:47, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Accent

message: I have just uploaded the image of Plath's grave after a recent visit. I will be the first to admit the quality is not brilliant. I noticed no defacement or evidence of attempts to deface the gravestone. I notice another Wikipedian has queried this below. I think this statement should be removed. Snecklifter 21:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the pic. I removed the sentence re vandalism to the gravestone. It was explained that they had replaced the original with some sort of tamper-proof material (hmmf), but I don't think the tid bit really added anything or was necessary. Thanks again for the image. --Evb-wiki 21:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The new paragraph reads much better - thank you for also resizing the pic. Snecklifter 09:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I have added the vandalism part again with a reference, albeit without reference to tamper-proof material. I agree that this is unnecessary. However I think that the fact that the stone has been vandalised shows the depth of feeling that some folks have about the Plath-Hughes relationship. I have also added info about the gravestone inscription. Snecklifter 10:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the cite.  This article is in dire need of references. Maybe now that we have a Ref. Sec., we can start collecting some. Cheers. --Evb-wiki 16:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree. Not that I'm obsessed with her death but have started to dig around for references and have added them to this section first. Snecklifter 13:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gravestone defacement 

message: *"Plath laid out cookies and milk for her children, sealed the door of the kitchen who slept above on the second floor."
This sentence in the last paragraph of the biographical section is not correct, but not sure how and what actually happened so would not be able to correct it. That last pararaph is in general a bit unclear and would need some more editing. -- srk 20:14, 17 January 2006
: I have added this information back as there are plenty of sources to substantiate this. I have added one of them as a reference. Snecklifter 13:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cookies and milk

message: While researching Sylvia Plath, I came across an interesting article about Plath and Hughes being involved in black magic.  Is this fiction by chance, because I've never seen it anywhere else!
Her Journals make reference to having enjoyed reading tarot cards, however they do not indicate a "religious" or serious attitude to this. High Heels on Wet Pavement 21:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Witchcraft? 

message: There are textual references for much of this information which really ought to be cited, as with much that is in this article... although there are a lot of correct details, these are not adequately referenced, and much of the article is not objective in tone, relying as it seems on online sources (some of them clearly contradictory), and people's memories of what they have read. The issue of her place of birth is a case in point. In addition, easily obtainable important info, such as the reordering v original order of the Ariel poems (printed in the back of the Faber edition of the collected poems) really should be included, and there are unattributed critical views for example in the Colossus section.  It's great that so many people contributed, but the article is very inconsistent in quality. As a realtive newbie, I don't know how to flag up the issue of the need for a collaborative effort to improve this article-- rather than just tinkering--- but it is sorely needed. :) High Heels on Wet Pavement 21:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: This article-- re wiki standards

message: I removed the trivia section because there was too much of it and it was too trivial (IMO).  If someone restores it please keep only the significant trivia (you know what I mean). RJFJR 22:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia section

message: ...and passed the project onto Freida and Nicholas...
onto whom? These names occur nowhere else in the article.  (Could be Sylvia's children but their names aren't given) RJFJR 23:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: These are Sylvia's children. --Evb-wiki 23:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who? 

message: Sylvia Spanish Translation.Raul Racedo
This link has two Plath poems in English w/a spanish trans of each.  But first there are a couple of Anne Sexton poems (engl & span). Because of that, and since this is a English-language wiki, I don't think it belongs here. --Evb-wiki 01:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spanish translation link

message: The cited source for the statement says Assia Wevill was Hughes' second wife . See books.guardian.co.uk. Do not change the text without providing a verifiable source to support your edit. --Evb-wiki 17:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly does appear that The Gaurdian contradicts itself.  We've been through this edit at least once before.  How about just repalcing "second wife" with "mistress"? That appears accurate. --Evb-wiki 19:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hughes' second wife, Assia Wevill  

message: [The following was copied from my talk page. --Evb-wiki 19:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly does appear that The Gaurdian contradicts itself.  We've been through this edit at least once before.  How about just repalcing "second wife" with "mistress"? That appears accurate. --Evb-wiki 19:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  not sure how to do this... 

message: Can we rectify the following seemingly contradictory claims?
:Otto Plath died on November 5, 1940, a week and a half after Plath's eighth birthday. He died of an embolism, following the amputation of a leg due to diabetes complications. Otto Plath ultimately died of diabetes mellitus; which at that time was a very treatable disease. Otto Plath however, did not receive proper treatment due to a wrongful personal diagnosis. Otto fell ill shortly after the death of a close friend due to lung cancer. Comparing the similarities between his friends symptoms and his own, Otto was convinced that he too was ill with lung cancer, and did not seek treatment until the illness had progressed too far.
What was the cause of death, an embolism or diabetes mellitus? --Evb-wiki 01:19, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Otto's death 

message: "This practice intensified following the suicide in 1969 of Assia Wevill, the woman he left Plath for, which led to claims of domestic violence by Hughes against Plath."
So are these claims made by Hughes, against Plath, or claims made by someone else, claims of domestic violence performed by Hughes, performed upon Plath?  Only the latter really makes sense to me but I don't know the story and it seems like the sentence is ambiguous due to poor wording...  If it is the latter, shouldn't we say who made the claims?
Zaku kai 18:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the wording is shoddy, but I take it to mean that claims were made by a third party (obviously, since Plath was dead at the time) regarding domestic violence performed by Hughes against Plath's person (meaning herself).  Perhaps a source can be found to support this?  And how would you suggest rewording it?  María (habla conmigo) 18:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Claims by Hughes against Plath" 

message: Is it pronounced "Plath" or "Plat"? Willnz0 05:13, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Please provide sources when adding factual content. Remember, information added to an article must be verifiable, and facts included must be attributed to a reliable source. Thanks. Happy editing. --Evb-wiki 13:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources and factual references 

message: I removed the following unsourced material:
:Sylvia Plath was raised as a Unitarian, but changed her views on religion throughout her life. While at Smith College, Plath considering herself an 'agnostic humanist'. While in England with Ted Hughes, she developed an interest in Paganism, under Hughes' influence. She also attended an Anglican Church whilst in England, and although enjoying the music and the ceremony, was driven away from the Church by a sermon praising the hydrogen bomb as the "happy prospect of the Second Coming". In her last days, Plath wrote to her mother, telling her, "the Unitarian Church is my church. How I miss it! There is just no choice here." Whilst identifying herself as a Unitarian, Plath always demonstrated a skepticism towards the promises of religion in her poetry, and utilised Judeo-Christian imagery frequently. 
Specific references should be provided to support this. --Evb-wiki 16:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion 

message: This section reads very disjointedly. It is in need of a cleanup, preferably starting with actually naming the college she attended at the top of the section. I would do it myself, but I literally dont have enough time. Jason McConnell-Leech 14:08, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  College Years 

message: The second paragraph of this section doesn't read too well. It's somewhat difficult to understand how the evidence that's presented shows that she didn't want to succeed in committing suicide.  The source seems to be slightly better, but the whole paragraph is already quite similar, except for a rearrangement of sentences.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.175.143 (talk) 04:33, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death 

message: I've never edited a wiki page before, but I would strongly urge that the first graf of the Sylvia Plath page be edited. The Bell Jar is not about Sylvia Plath's struggle with bipolar disorder - Plath was never formally diagnosed with bipolar disorder or any specific illness. As opposed to writing that The Bell Jar is about her struggle with depression, it would be best to describe the novel as a female rite-of-passage novel, a twin to Catcher in the Rye, starring Esther Greenwood, a bright, ambitious Smith College student who begins to experience a breakdown while interning for a fashion magazine in New York, based on Plath's experience interning at Mademoiselle and her subsequent breakdown and suicide attempt afterwards.
You can cite the foreword to the current paperback version of the novel by Frances McCullough.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maryagale (talk • contribs) 18:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bipolar Disorder 

message: I have interviewed Lois Ames  Plath's social worker and the author of the intro to "The Bell Jar"  The link is as follows:  http://dougholder.blogspot.com/2005/07/lois-ames-confidante-to-sylvia-plath.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.134.101 (talk) 23:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lois Ames Interview

message: Substituted at 15:54, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: There's no mention in this article of "Shura", a daughter who died with Plath?, see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,3857472,00.html"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.1.152.154 (talk) 15:39, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Shura was Assia Wevill's daughter and died with her, not Plath. --Evb-wiki (talk) 15:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of Shura? 

message: "Hughes sealed two of them until February 11, 2013, the fiftieth anniversary of Plath's death." 
The above information does not make sense and also does not correspond with the rest of the article. Can someone please correct it to the right date, i have no knowledge of when it is but assume it to be 1974. Can someone confirm the date please.--Goapples (talk) 16:03, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I read her journals.  The date refers to when they would have been reopened, not when he actually did the sealing.  If my memory is correct, he unsealed them for the unabridged publication. hbdragon88 (talk) 04:32, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Journals 

message: There's plenty of talk about her poetry out there, quotes such as:
Often, her work is singled out for the intense coupling of its violent or disturbed imagery and its playful use of alliteration and rhyme.
are easy enough to find, as well as contrasts between the structured Colossus poems verses the free-flowing Ariel poems. I think someone(possibly me) should split life and poetry, and just write a section on the characteristics of her poetry. (will probably start soon if no one else wants to)
Ink Falls (talk) 00:28, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it! Source it well, by books if poss. Good luck Spanglej (talk) 05:04, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

text: ... need to check out books, will wait for summer. If anyone else has some expertise feel free to go ahead and start one.Ink Falls (talk) 20:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poetry 

message: Are these images fair use and if so can somebody upload them? Sylvia Plath Exhibit If so we could make a gallery at the end of the page. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ink Falls (talk • contribs) 
:Please note that Wikipedia is not a repository for images. --Evb-wiki (talk) 21:16, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: "Sylvia Plath (1932-1963)". pseudonym Victoria Lucas, Books and Writers, www.kirjasto.sci.fi (2000). http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/splath.htm. Retrieved on 2007-06-25
The above website appears to not meet the requirements of being a reliable source since it is self published. There is a discussion [here]. There is also a discussion at the [plagiarism talk page] about how to handle this issue.-Crunchy Numbers (talk) 03:34, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a website. Websites function by plagiarism - that's what they are, largely, I would have thought. That doesn't make it right, just bog standard. Most articles feature dodgy website sources somewhere. If going for GA status, then, no, it may not stand. Otherwise, most of the weblinks are duff if you examine their sources, wouldn't you say? Spanglej (talk) 05:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  possible unreliable source used on this page 

message: I think we should add info about their first encounter. That Sylvia bit him on the cheek, hard(drawing blood), and the ominous foreshadowing of her writing that he will be "the death of her" after their initial encounter are two colorful facts I think would be interesting to the reader. Ink Falls 23:55, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure - add it in, with several good books refs. Go for it. Spanglej (talk) 01:09, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Kk, gimme like a week, right now I got midterms to study for. ;)  Ink Falls 04:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Their first encounter

message: I think the pop culture reference section is important enough to stay. It shows her legacy and how she continues to influence our culture to this day. Ink Falls 18:35, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: While I will not revert your edit (which was in fact a revert of mine), I advise you to rethink your strategy.  WP:TRIVIA -- an MOS guideline -- advises that such trivia-related sections should be avoided for a myriad of reasons.  Important information as to Plath's influence and imprint on popular culture (which I honestly do not believe includes or encapsulates one Lady Gaga song) should be integrated into the article, not stand alone as a collector of fancruft.  Such sections have been killed on sight before (see here for example, and check the history), so this is not new.  I strongly advocate the current section's removal. María (habla conmigo) 18:43, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What does Wikipedia say on pop culture reference sections? Do you know, I will try to check. Btw, you can revert my edit if you feel like it, I do not mind, you have a fair point. Ink Falls 18:46, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

text: "This guideline does not suggest the inclusion or exclusion of any information".  It's a guideline, not policy, which is why common sense comes into play.  Here's the summary: trivia sections (including pop culture refs) are discouraged as a whole; they have consistently been removed from this article in the past; Lady Gaga songs, Simpsons and Family Guy one-liners are not crucial to the understanding of Plath's influence or legacy; if it cannot be integrated into the rest of the article, it shouldn't exist in fancruft form.  Anything else? María (habla conmigo) 18:56, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would vote for a total trivia cut. I don't think any of it serves to explore Plath's legacy. Spanglej (talk) 20:05, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pop Culture references 

message: This edit undid several recent changes I made. Firstly, there's no rationale given for arbitrarily downsizing the images; on high-resolution displays it makes them tiny compared to the article body, rather than scaling appropriately. Secondly, an article on a person is by definition a biography in its entirety; it therefore makes little sense labelling one section of such an article "Biography".
The reply I received on my talk was: The heading "Biography" is apt for the narrative description of her life - early years, college life, death. There is a section on Works including impact and critique of Plath's publications. If the photos are at automatic  size then Hughes' head is larger than the Fitzroy Square house. It seems appropriate to re-size the images accordingly.
Again, the whole article is a biography: if one were to buy a hardback biographjy, one would not expect the chapters on the subject's life and works to be titled "biography". As for the images, it is highly unlikely that a reader is going to be confused or disoriented by Hughes's head being larger than the house: readers are presumably aware that not all of our photographs are to scale with each other. These changes should be added back. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In terms of GAs and FAs, Samuel Johnson and Albert Einstein use the heading "Biography". William Butler Yeats, Philip Larkin, Charles Dickens and Emily Dickenson use "Life". As 'biography' means 'the study of a life'  it really seems to change little. Does "Life" work better? Whatever works. In terms of images - It wasn't an arbritary edit and it wasn't so much an issue of confusing the reader. At auto size Hughes' large scowling head is the bigger than the house. It looked daft to me and disproportionate in terms of page design. Those were the reasons. No biggie. Spanglej (talk) 17:23, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  "Life" is a fine compromise for me; I'll get to fixing Yeats and Einstein in time. As for the images, MOS:IMAGES gives a list of examples when resizing images might be appropriate, and this doesn't seem to be one. Given that the portrait is of Hughes at an advanced age, rather than at the time he and Plath were married, might it be that it could simply be removed? It's arguably confusing simply having it, being as it was taken thirty years after her death. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images, section titles 

message: Re the various edits I made today - I haven't removed anything. I've added references and extra biog and crit detail. There is some re-arrangement that makes sense of the new material, fixing of links and WP syntax and that's about it.  Best wishes Spanglej (talk) 05:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work so far, Spanglej.  I've gone through the first half of the article and made some fixes/changes.  The references are a bit of a mess, and we need to decide whether we're using citation templates or not for web-based sources.  Also, perhaps there should be a separate "Works cited" section to list all utilized books and journal articles, so that short hand references (ie, "Kirk, p. 23") can be listed in the reflist.  Either way, there are some book sources that are missing crucial information, such as page numbers, ISBNs and/or city of publication.  Be on the lookout for these. María (habla conmigo) 13:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Many thanks Maria. Do citations always ideally need a page ref and a city or publication? Different articles seem to do it differently. Citation insight is def a weak spot with me. I have some WP rulebook reading to do. Best wishes Spanglej (talk) 14:41, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Different articles are wrong, unfortunately; book sources always require page refs and complete bibliographic info per WP:CITE.  Cites should be formatted consistently and correctly to help readability and academic/encyclopedic awesomeness.  If there is a specific page number to be cited, then cite it; if there's a publisher/city of publication, then list it.  Readers will thank you for it. :) María (habla conmigo) 14:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a general good practice preference for citation templates? Spanglej (talk) 15:07, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There is, but they're not required by any means.  Some editors prefer them because it helps take the guess work out of what goes where and how; I used them heavily in the past for that very reason (see Knut (polar bear), which uses all citation templates), but now I do them by hand because I have a fairly good sense of what to do know.  Whatever is easiest for the primary contributors, really. María (habla conmigo) 15:18, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Spanglej (talk) 15:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding refs 29 June 2010 

message: Just because a large amount of wikipedia entries have "Controversy" sections, it does not mean that this article requires one. The first sentence in this section (and there are only two (2) sentences, reads:
"In the realms of literary criticism and biography published after her death, the debate concerning Plath's literary estate very often resembles a struggle between readers who side with her and those who side with Hughes.[24]"
 
A rather vague and pointless statement, which is in turn referenced to a rather recent newspaper article. Hardly a scholarly source. The second sentence states that
"Hughes has been accused[25] of attempting to control the estate for his own ends although royalties from Plath's poetry have been placed into a trust account for their two children, Frieda and Nicholas.[26]"
 
Here the source seems more appropriate:
 
Gill, Jo (2006) The Cambridge companion to Sylvia Plath Cambridge University Press p9-10 ISBN0521844967
 
However, I have just read those two pages (9 and 10) the terms "accused" and "for his own ends" seem to be overstating the facts. What the book says, in those very same pages, is that Hughes found himself in an awkward position: facing "financial anxieties" due to unpaid back taxes as a result from the royalties from Palth's books. The irony is that the financial misfortune stemmed from the literary gift of his wife, in addition to -probably- Hughes being slightly inept when dealing with money. Again: "accused"? "for his own ends"? This is the person who championed Plath's work the most. In any case, what pages 9-10 depict the most, is Hughes' interest in avoiding being unfairly demonised by biased biographers.
 
And, in any case, simply because something made it into a book (an anecdote, a minor footnote, etc.), it does not mean it should make it into an encyclopedic entry. For that matter, "Richard murphy, an Irish poet (...), accuses Plath of unwelcome sexual advances during a brief stay as his houseguest in September 1962" (from The Cambridge Companion to Sylvia Plath, p. 10). I don't see a "Sylvia Plath controversy" section in this page. I am, of course, not suggesting that one is needed. I am only hoping maturity and sound judgement will prevail. 134.219.202.104 (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ted Hughes controversy?

message: One of the categories is "People with bipolar disorder." Nowhere in the article is this mentioned. I'm no Plath scholar, but I've read a couple biographies and many articles and have never seen a diagnosis of bipolar disorder mentioned. Now, I could be wrong, but the Wiki article doesn't mention it so why is it here?Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 00:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Bi-polar disorder is a recent diagnosis. It's difficult make retrogressive (or 'historical') diagnoses. There is evidence from her GP (mentioned) that he prescribed her anti-depressants. Unless there is evidence, the Bi-polar category should not be applied. Spanglej (talk) 01:21, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Categories

message: I can't find what the first reference in the list refers back to in the article. Is it just leftover from another version? If so, should it be deleted?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.104.36.146 (talk) 00:10, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the first three refs (1,2 and 3) appear to be glitched and superseded long ago. Not sure how to delete them as they are no longer part of the text. Any help welcome.Span (talk) 00:56, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Hold on a second there. The references are being used inside the infobox, you just have to click on the "show" button under influenced to get them, and then they work. Nothing is wrong.--AerobicFox (talk) 00:57, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah. My Wikipedia lesson of the day. Cheers Span (talk) 01:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  stray references 

message: The Town of Grabow, where Otto Plath was born, is in the region of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. It became part of Poland in 1945, following the Potsdam Agreement. It went back to become part of Germany in 1949. In 1885, Otto Plath was born, it was part of Germany and it is again today. The Kirk biography gives Germany as his birth place. That's good enough for me. Span (talk) 19:22, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Otto Plath's birth place  

message: Plath's first suicide attempt took place immediately AFTER a series of injudiciously applied electroshocks in a state clinic, not before. Rides (talk) 20:44, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's fixed. Span (talk) 22:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronological inaccuracy in 'College years' 

message: From what I've read, it is not accurate to say that Hughes "lost [...] an unfinished novel." No one knows for sure what happened to it. So I'm removing that and adding a little paragraph about the lost novel (what I quoted, somehow, seems to be the only existing reference in this article!).
75.73.156.135 (talk) 04:50, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double Exposure: the lost novel 

message: The article cites carbon monoxide poisoning as the cause of death, but then describes conditions under which CO poisoning would have been impossible. To wit, "At approximately 4.30 am, Plath had placed her head in the oven, while the gas was turned on, with the pilot light unlit."  Carbon monxide is the result of combustion. If the pilot light was "unlit" (sic), there would have been no source for carbon monoxide. 24.131.254.12 (talk) 11:41, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've edited to reflect what is stated in the current biography sources given - official given cause of death by Carbon Monoxide. I can find no good source for an unlit pilot light. Thanks for the flag. "Rage, rage, against the dying of the pilot light", as they say. Best wishes Span (talk) 19:18, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The original point made was that carbon monoxide poisoning can only happen when gas is burnt. As the oven flame was off and there was no pilot light burning no carbon monoxide could have been produced. Poisoning by inhalation of gas would have killed her if the oven's gas was turned on without a flame.Span (talk) 03:00, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

text: I would have thought that the entry on her death certificate would be quite conclusive, regardless of gas composition, pilot lights or bimetallic strips etc., etc.  Martinevans123 (talk) 08:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

text: Span - I'm sure you're right. If anyone is interested, a Goggle Images search for "Sylvia Plath" + "death certificate" yields a few examples of uploads that appear to be perfectly genuine, if a little creepy. The entry for "Cause of death" seems to me to read as follows: "Certified by Geo. H. Molyan, Deputy Coroner for the County of London to be Carbon Monoxide Poisoning  (domestic gas) whilst suffering from depression. Did kill herself". Martinevans123 (talk) 19:44, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carbon Monoxide poisoning? 

message: Just wondering if this (largely negative) assessment of her  could be used somewhere in the legacy section. Jprw (talk) 07:42, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting, but 1. I don't believe Stephen Akey (the author of the article you've linked to) is notable or an authority on the subject, 2. the article itself seems like an opinion piece, with no references that I can see, and 3. it's not certain that Open Letters Monthly fulfills WP:RS.  Three strikes. :) María (yllosubmarine) 12:27, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

text: Agreed, literary criticism would certainly be useful in the article -- were it from a reputable source.  For example, points of view from her contemporaries (whether negative or positive) would be great, as would opinions from notable critics and/or writers of today.  There are absolutely more reliable and academic sources available to add to the article without involving an essay written by a non-expert and posted to a questionable, user-generated website. María (yllosubmarine) 13:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent appraisal

message: There is the famous quote (and I am unsure of who said it) "Go Plath yourself." Shall we bring this onto here? Also Sylvia has some famous quotes as well. It could make for an interesting secion. Alliereborn (talk) 05:14, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a link box at the base of the article to the Wikiquote page for Plath. I don't think adding the phrase "go Plath yourself" is adding substantive content to the article. If there are strong secondary articles discussing the cultural  perception/impact of Plath's death, then they may be valid to add. Span (talk) 08:37, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As Span said above, already linked. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:50, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes 

message: So I was rereading the article, and the part where it mentions when Ted fell in love with Assia, and it mentions the poem he wrote about her stuck me off sort of. I don't think using the poem in an article about Sylvia Plath is appropriate because it wasn't written for Sylvia, it was written for Assia. Sure it has to do with when the cheating with Assia began, but that has nothing to do with Sylvia other than she left him shortly after the affair began. It's shown on Ted's page and on the page for Assia, but I don't think it should be included in this article, I think the poem should be deleted. --Matt723star (talk) 04:36, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of Dreamers poem

message: Is the 2013 book by Andrew Wilson notable: ? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:03, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Mad Girl’s Love Song'' 

message: I think the claim that Plath was the "first poet to win a Pulitzer Prize posthumously" is incorrect.  
See article:
http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/03/01/home/plath-pulitzer.html
71.239.125.116 (talk) 06:54, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is most definitely incorrect, as William Carlos Williams won the Pulitzer in 1963 for Pictures From Brueghel. The Pulitzer was awarded several months after his death. This entry needs to be amended or deleted as it is false. Pictures from Brueghel ReubenCopley (talk) 16:37, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

text: The article doesn't appear to currently make that claim. Anastrophe (talk) 16:52, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it doesn't. Thanks, ReubenCopley, for removing it. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:15, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pulitzer Prize for Poetry 

message: The "Thomas, David N. (2008). Fatal Neglect: Who Killed Dylan Thomas?. p. 35. . " source currently states she cut her legs before her second suicide attempt in 1953. There's no first or even second hand sources saying she actually cut her legs, she does not mention the incident or the scars in her journals or poetry, Ted Hughes only mentions the scar she got on her face after her first suicide attempt in his poetry. The only reference she ever makes to cutting herself is in the poem "Cut", could someone more in the know please provide a source.
37.46.182.125 (talk) 02:34, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The original source of this information seems to be "Bitter Fame: A Life of Sylvia Plath" by Anne Stevenson written in 1989, no source seems to be given. Is this simply not true? 37.46.182.125 (talk) 03:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Leg cutting/gashing'' 

message: A quote box at the end of the "Themes" section is overlapping the section which follows, obscuring its name. Does anyone know how to fix this?--Quisqualis (talk) 05:54, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: How about now? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:07, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Much better!--Quisqualis (talk) 01:02, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting problem 

message: It’s aloof to continually refer to someone by their surname. Peterms64 (talk) 12:12, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Aloof or not, it's just Wikipedia policy. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:25, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not just Wikipedia policy, it is standard formal language. Referring to someone by their first name shows a degree of familiarity that is not appropriate in a formal text and may even be seen as rude. --Khajidha (talk) 14:10, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Peter, welcome to Wikipedia. There are lots of protocols and they take quite a bit of getting used to. Using surnames is a standard academic style, as Khajida says. More info on WP Manual of Style approaches here. Best wishes Anna (talk) 14:21, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Avoiding first name 

message: 'In the autumn of 1962, only four months before her death in February 1963, Sylvia Plath wrote a cluster of extraordinary poems about Bees.  She had taken up beekeeping that June and wrote excitedly to her mother in America to describe the events of attending a local beekeepers’ meeting in the Devon village of North Tawton'
http://dublinbees.org/members-area/sylvia-plath-and-the-bees/
Can we add this hobby to Plaths wikipedia page?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamreddave (talk • contribs) 11:01, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems notable to me, go for it.Eruditess (talk) 09:45, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Beekeeper

message: I know this probably isn't anything article worthy, but I just watched the biopic about her and Ted Hughes, and towards the end she starts smoking to "try new things". Is there any proof that she really did this, or is it just something the filmmakers added for melodrama? And hey, if it is true, maybe it could serve a purpose in the article, perhaps somewhere around her death. --Matt723star (talk) 20:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can find a reliable source then definitely go for it.Eruditess (talk) 09:46, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Smoker? 

message: Wikipedia manual of style says about the lead section: "It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies," see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section
I had included: "Their relationship was tumultuous, as Plath wrote in letters about the abuse she suffered at his hands. "
Ted Hughes article had said, in its lead section, "Some admirers of Plath and critics blamed him for her death after the revelation of letters written by Plath, which mention that Hughes had beaten her two days before she had a miscarriage in 1961, and that he also told Plath he wished that she were dead."
However, the same user that removed the sentence I had put in Plath's article removed that section too from Hughes' page without opening discussion on the talk page. We should discuss this here. I would like to say that I believe the section should be included in the lead section, as it is a prominent controversy in Plath's life and one she wrote about many times, including in her most acclaimed work. Her article has an entire section titled "Hughes controversies." I think it is essential to note the tumultuous nature of their relationship in the lead section as it was a very notable part of her life. I am open to other perspectives but this should be discussed. AvatarQX (talk) 23:05, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I would expect the lead sections of both articles to be largely comparable and reciprocal. I don't see your proposed sentence as unreasonable. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:58, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that it's better to keep focus on their lives and work. I would keep the discussions of what happened when, to the body of the article. They both had full writing lives and the bulk of the article should be dedicated to those and keep a balance. The history of both articles show that the death of Plath has tended to over-dominate the whole. One sentence I think in each article lead would be ok. Going into details of allegations in the lead can't give a sense of the NPOV nuances. Both pieces were subjected to pointy edit warring for years. Of late, they have been stable, which does count for something.  Anna (talk) 01:16, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I understand the want to keep away from edit warring, but I do think that (unfortunately) their tumultuous relationship was a huge part of both of their lives. Particularly with Plath, whose most famous works (Daddy, for example) focus on the nature of that relationship. I don't think noting that it was a tumultuous relationship & noting Sylvia's own words about him is a bad thing; it clearly was a huge part of her life. The death of Plath will dominate their lives, because it was a huge thing that happened to their legacies. I understand they were writers first, but we can't always choose what we're remembered for. Unfortunately for Hughes, that's Sylvia, and unfortunately for Sylvia, her death does dominate discussion around her. For example, you say you want to keep focus on their lives; well, a huge part of Sylvia's life was this abusive relationship, abusive in her own words, and I don't think it's an NPOV issue if we're citing her own words about it. I certainly have no interest in edit warring so if the majority decides we should keep it out, obviously I will, but so far I'm just not sure this position makes sense to me.  AvatarQX (talk) 18:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

text: Adding "Their relationship was tumultuous, as Plath wrote in letters about the abuse she suffered at his hands", with the source provided, immediately after the sentence "She married fellow poet Ted Hughes in 1956, and they lived together in the United States and then in England", looks reasonable to me. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, I hadn't mentioned the miscarriage in Plath's article; that can be added to a smaller section. I believe that was only in Hughes' article, and I have no qualms about removing it from there. For the lede, I agree that "Their relationship was tumultuous, as Plath wrote in letters about the abuse she suffered at his hands" suffices. If that works for everyone, I'll put it back in. AvatarQX (talk) 05:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding sentence about her and Ted Hughes relationship in the main part of the article 

message: Via the WP:LIBRARY, the book Sylvia Plath's Fiction: A Critical Study by Luke Ferretter is available here. The book's index says  putting discussion in the "Introduction" and in "Plath's Poetry and Fiction"... and as far as I can tell there's nothing about  or 
These sorts of ideas  in the reference to the Lost Manuscripts blog post, which doesn't have any editorial oversight so I'm not sure why it's a source in the first place? Ironically the one place it is being used in the article is to quote Hughes; this is something Ferretter could actually be used to reference:  (p. 15).
This is a Good Article so I didn't want to make too many drastic changes myself but I figured I'd flag this for editors more familiar with this article / the literature on Plath. Umimmak (talk) 04:47, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It was added in this edit in 2015, the second of two edits  made in the article space and their last edit on Wikipedia overall. Umimmak (talk) 05:15, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

text: Currently we have a paragraph that has five sources all of which are marked , i.e. unsourced. I'm not sure this should appear in a Good Article. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:52, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: If that material was added in 2015, it was part of the article that was reviewed as Good Article in 2017. // I reviewed Ferretter's "Introduction" and chapter "Plath's Poetry and Fiction", and I couldn't find any mention of "1970", "lost", "stolen" or "Smith College" in connection with Double Exposure. The only thing I could verify from the article's section "Double Exposure" in Ferretter's book was that it was an unfinished novel, and some remarks about its content. I agree with Umimmak's assessment of lostmanuscripts.com as an unreliable source. So there's not much left for that paragraph, which is a pity because it needs to be mentioned. Umimmak suggest that writings by Ted and Olwyn Hughes in relation to the number of written pages of Double Exposure reported in Ferretter's "Introduction" could be used. I suggest to trim the section "Double Exposure" of everything about the manuscript's disappearance/secret copy/etc. The unreliable source lostmanuscripts.com should be replaced with Ferretter's "Introduction", as suggested above. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:56, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:23, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

text: They’ve already been removed but they were the sentences I ’ed above. Umimmak (talk) 05:09, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ferretter re ''Double Exposure'' 

message: Is it really necessary that a wiki article includes details like Hughes and Plath honeymooned in Benidorm?
It’s hardly pertinent; it’s available in any biography, and is a detail that very rarely appears in similar wiki sites. 131.111.5.1 (talk) 11:07, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much detail