Talk:W. S. Merwin

message: A clearly impermissible contrib (too complex to bother further characterizing) has been removed here.  --Jerzy•t 16:42  & 17:15, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: I'm not sure i was listening carefully enuf to be able to fully characterize the gaps. But one fact caught my attention when Terry Gross rebroadcast an interview today: he surprised her by saying he had been confined in a mental hospital after enlisting in the military and then becoming a conscientious objector. It may not be important to understanding him, but the assumption that it's not would be highly PoV! --Jerzy•t 16:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flesh out bio 

message: I counted over 60 Easter egg links to years in poetry and literature in the form of XXXX in this article before I lost count. Does anybody think they are worth keeping? I don't. --John (talk) 02:17, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I do. And WP:EGG states make sure that the reader knows what to expect. At the top of the "Bibliography" section, the reader is told exactly what to expect, with an explanation of the year-in-poetry links. The top of that style guideline states Appropriate links provide instant pathways to locations within and outside the project that are likely to increase readers' understanding of the topic at hand. The topic at hand in the list of Merwin's books is his books. Each link provides the context for that book in terms of the larger poetry scene around Merwin at the time of publication. Readers will have an interest in knowing what other poets were publishing at the same time, getting awards at the same time and so on. The links are also rather unabtrusive -- it's a list, after all, and we're not interrupting some flow or distracting our readers by it. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 15:43, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

text: John, you may not have noticed the explanation at the top of the Bibliography and Awards sections. I notice you didn't remove them when you removed the links, which I've now restored. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 15:46, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Keep links The links don't bother me at all. I hadn't thought about the context that JohnWBarber brings up above, but that is an excellent use for these links. Most users can easily hit the back button in the browser if they don't like where a link takes them. — Diiscool (talk) 16:01, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I still think they are useless and look stupid, but it isn't the end of the world if they remain. --John (talk) 22:12, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlinking? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on W. S. Merwin. 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/20051001111638/http://www.barclayagency.com/merwin.html to http://www.barclayagency.com/merwin.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100302203346/http://www.hudsonreview.com/new/article-index.php to http://www.hudsonreview.com/new/article-index.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051001111638/http://www.barclayagency.com/merwin.html to http://www.barclayagency.com/merwin.html
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) 15:18, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified