Talk:Joyce Kilmer

message: I remember reading this article when it became a GA and notice it is still well-written but there are many extra, unnecessary sections.  It is a worthy subject for GA status and should be promoted again.  To do so: (1) I would remove the honors and awards section (or make it one paragraph) because right now it looks like an uncontrollable list--something better as List of places and things named for Joyce Kilmer.  I'll remove the text as is and place it here on the talk page below and then write a paragraph or two to be inserted in the article about "there are many places named after..."  (2) I would also remove the section on Trees to its own article (Trees (poem) which is now a redirect). (3) Perhaps a little cleaning of the prose and a copyedit and we can make this a GA again.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:40, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: This was once a Good Article--it can be again

message: There are a ton of places named after Joyce Kilmer that I removed from the article because it was a list that detracted from the discussion of the article's subject.  Should this list of places (schools, parks, national forests) named after Kilmer be set up as an article as List of places named after Joyce Kilmer or as Joyce Kilmer (disambiguation).  I would lean toward the first option, but am not entirely sure on the policy regarding this practice.  Please advise. --ColonelHenry (talk) 13:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead and make it. Kdammers (talk) 01:38, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Should we?

message: Per WP:BRD, and with consideration of WP:TCREEP, I've removed a recently added "military person infobox" (q.v. at right). We don't need multiple infoboxes in a lede (i.e. clutter), and the military person infobox added by an IP user (108.211.37.125) is relatively unnecessary as it only mentions five facts that are mentioned sufficiently in the article--and discussed second paragraph of the lede which is far more informative than the infobox.  Further detail is added in the appropriate biographical materials discussing his military service.  We already have an infobox that focuses on his primary contribution to posterity (i.e. his poetry), and it is mentioned there that he was a soldier, amongst other professions.  That should be sufficient, and this additional infobox--aside from cluttering the article--is rather unnecessary.--ColonelHenry (talk) 14:53, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed military person infobox (22JUN13)

message: The article on Joyce Kilmer says, "His body was carried in and buried by the side of Ames" but does not otherwise mention who Ames is.Dcb2 (talk) 05:14, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mention of "Ames" but no identification of who this is. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Joyce Kilmer. 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/20081115234705/http://www.jnj.com/connect/about-jnj/company-history/founders/ to http://www.jnj.com/connect/about-jnj/company-history/founders/
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) 12:12, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have the first volume of Joyce Kilmer: Poems, Essays and Letters, edited by Robert Cortes Holliday (who is quoted frequently in the article) and published in New York by George H. Doran Company in 1918. The photo identified here as a 1908 yearbook photo is the frontispiece of the book. In the book, the photo is identified as the "last civilian portrait" of Kilmer, aged 30, and © Underwood & Underwood. I am wondering what the authority is for identifying it as a 1908 yearbook portrait.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by ELCore (talk • contribs) 15:37, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "1908" Portrait 

message: On 2019 March 3‎ at 11:01, Ellesmithfagan made an edit labelled "Trees":  clarifies a statement", but it seems to be to be Original Research (or at least not very useful info). Either way, it could use some copy editing, but if the section (titled "INSIGHT") is going to be removed, I see no reason to improve it.
Please advise,
Thank you,
WesT (talk) 17:14, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looking for assistance with clarifying a possibly Original Research issue