Talk:A Vindication of the Rights of Woman/Archive 1

message: the woman question article does not cover the meaning mentioned in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman --Melaen 19:58, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: the woman question

message: The section about this book in the article Mary Wollstonecraft is much more informative.KSchutte 22:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This comment has, I believe, been negated by my improvements to the VRW page. Awadewit 11:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: mary wollstonecraft article

message: As the near sole author of this page, I do not believe that it is of GA quality. In my comments on the B-ranking that I gave it I mentioned some of the improvements that still need to be made. They still stand in my opinion and I am slowly addressing them. Give me time! (If I were reviewing this for GA, I would say that it should fail on comprehensiveness - it needs sections on "Republicanism" and "Reception.") Thanks. Awadewit 06:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh whoops.  There doesn't seem to be an un-nominating procedure for GAC? -Malkinann 06:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I briefly looked for one but didn't see one. I am unfamiliar with GA, though. Awadewit 07:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry - the worst it can do is fail, right? -Malkinann 07:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's fine. Perhaps I'll receive some constructive criticism. Awadewit 07:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the page is pretty much ready now. I have added the mising sections and done a brief copyedit run-through. Hopefully I will have time for one more run-through. Awadewit 06:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've revised the page even more now, so I hope its even better. Awadewit 21:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've revised yet more. Awadewit 10:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good Article Nomination

message: Something of a mischaracterisation as to how it was received in England.  Although lauded by a few thinkers, these were very much in the minority, and in general, it received about as much support as the Bolshevik later would.  --Daniel C. Boyer 21:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I try to make clear, at the beginning of the French Revolution, the majority of the English supported the "revolutionaries." It was not until 1792-3 that their support really began to wane. You might read Marilyn Butler's excellent introduction to her selection of pamphlets from the "Revolution Controvery." It begins "As a public issue, the 'Revolution debate' lasted for about six years, from the first English rejoicings at France's new dawn in 1789, to December 1795, when Pitt's government introduced measures to stop the spread of radicalism by the printed and spoken word." (1) This book, Burke, Paine, Godwin, and the Revolution Controversy, is cited in my notes to the article.Awadewit 22:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: French Revolution

message: :GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
#It is stable.
#:
#It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
#:a (tagged and captioned):  b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
#Overall: 
#:a Pass/Fail: --Rmky87 08:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Review

message: There is no requirement, as far as I know, that blockquotes be in the silly-looking "c quotes". I see no reason to add them. Awadewit | talk 19:04, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: C quotes

message: Substituted at 20:21, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment