Talk:Anthony Esolen

message: "blank verse, or unrhymed poetry written in iambic pentameter (first notable for its use in Milton's Paradise Lost)" is ludicrous.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.60.30.32 (talk) 17:45, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Shakespeare, for one, heavily uses iambic pentameter, and precedes Milton. If no one objects, I'm for removing that reference to Milton.Mlouns (talk) 16:16, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  what??? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Anthony M. Esolen. 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  tag to https://books.benedictpress.com/index.php/page/shop:flypage/product_id/1348/keywords/esolen/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090209001750/http://www.zenit.org:80/article-19444?l=english to http://www.zenit.org/article-19444?l=english
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080704083536/http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1090/article_detail.asp to http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1090/article_detail.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081011201710/http://claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1506/article_detail.asp to http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1506/article_detail.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:33, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I added Lucretius' name to the first one but then stopped. Is it normal for translations to be listed without reference to the original author, even when they are authors as well known as Lucretius and Dante? Wildgraf quinn (talk) 21:40, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translations 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Anthony Esolen. 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/20110614140639/http://www.providence.edu/English/Faculty/esolen.htm to http://www.providence.edu/English/Faculty/esolen.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:40, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Anthony Esolen. 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/20170521122210/http://www.providence.edu/english/faculty/Pages/aesolen.aspx to http://www.providence.edu/english/faculty/Pages/aesolen.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:45, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: As I was updating the Wikipedia:Good articles/Philosophy and religion section, I wasn't sure of the best category this article would fit within. I put it under religious figures for now, but that doesn't seem to be a good fit. Any suggestions?  DoctorG  (talk) 12:49, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thinking about this, I'd make it a Language and literature GA and list him as a writer. The issue here is that he's not actually notable for any of the recent stuff that tends to be religious focused: if that was it we wouldn't have an article on him. He's notable as a Dante translator. I considered whether it'd be appropriate to list him as a philosopher, but I don't think that would apply: he writes columns in conservative magazines and to my knowledge has never published an actual work of academic philosophy. He's certainly not a religious leader or figure: just a right of centre academic who in his non-academic work plays politics on disputes within the religion he is a member of. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:20, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed, that is a much better fit. I'll make the change. DoctorG  (talk) 15:34, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

text: Changes have been made, I think this is a much better categorization. Thanks, , for your input. DoctorG  (talk) 15:47, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct topic/category 

message: Hello everyone,
I have concerns over the following sentence describing Esolen’s writing under the “Literary Work” section:
“His prose is notable for its florid, overwrought quality, paired with arguments for social conservatism that rely on assertions not rooted in evidence.”
The sentence seems to make an accusation that is unsupported by the source, and applies it to the whole body of Esolen’s work, rather than one article, as the source does.  The source itself also strikes me as biased, as it has a clearly political slant to it.  I think it might be better if the sentence were rephrased to stare that “some accuse [Esolen] of relying on assertions not rooted in evidence.”  An alternate opinion on the same subject might also be effective to ensure a neutral perspective.
Dlmartineau01 Dlmartineau01 (talk) 18:16, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potentially Biased Language