Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Ved Vejen

< Template:Did you know nominations
Round symbols for illustrating comments about the DYK nomination  The following is an archived discussion of Ved Vejen's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination's (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the DYK WikiProject's (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:06, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Ved Vejen edit

(
)

Ved Vejen cover

  • ... that even though Ved Vejen (cover pictured) was written in 1886, the hidden pain of loneliness theme is meaningful to today's readership?

Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk), Ipigott (talk), Rosiestep (talk). Nominated by Rosiestep (talk) at 19:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

  • An interesting article. I'm okay on the nomination slippage, someone once gave me a similar break on one of my DYKs. Article length, neutrality okay. Image in public domain, I guess (US law versus Danish?) Sourcing had some issues with careless misattributions from Google Books - don't credit editors alone, find the writers of individual chapters and entries! I've fixed up the English ones, but one of the article editors needs to double-check the Danish ones. Hook length and interest point is okay, if a bit awkwardly worded to my ear, but the article text behind it is problematic: "It is not just Bang's portrayal of a bygone provincial world that seems so typically Danish but his mastery in making the hidden pain of loneliness so meaningful to today's readership." When is the story set, compared to when it was written? Is it typically Danish to portray bygone worlds, or to write in a way that readers a century later find the work meaningful, or both? Is this a direct quote (translated) from the Culture Canon text, or a looser paraphrase? Wasted Time R (talk) 02:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I left a note on Ipigott's talkpage about Wasted Time R's comment (as Ipigott may not watchlist dyk); he responded on my talkpage:
"Hi Rosiestep. I saw your comments on Ved Vejen and I actually attempted to address them in the nominations but although I turned up the reviewer's text (by scanning for Ved Vejen in the DYK nominations), I could not see how to get in to comment on it. I think I have told you before that the reason I do not nominate articles myself is that I find the mechanics far too difficult to handle. No wonder so few newcomers dare to venture into DYK. Anyway, I can try to answer the concerns. There is indeed a Google reference to a Danish book on the subject but this is not one of mine. Perhaps Dr. B's? To tell you the truth, I cannot really see its relevance to the article and I cannot immediately see whether it was the author of the book or someone else who commented on Ved Vejen. Probably best just to remove it. In regard to the awkward wording, as far as I can see the prose is generally OK. I guess the awkward passages are the ones in which direct quotes are given from the original sources. I suppose these could be c/e'd into reported speech or whatever but as they are not mine I don't really feel like editing them. As for the text beginning "It is not just Bang's portrayal...", this is indeed an accurate translation of a comment made by the full canon committee on literature. The original Danish is "Men der er ikke kun tale om et lydhørt portræt af en svunden provinsverden, der virker så typisk dansk. Det er Bangs kunst at gøre den lille egoisme og den skjulte ensomheds uheroiske smerte genkendelige også for nutidige læsere." Word for word this translates as "But it is not just a matter of a sympathetic portrayal of a bygone provincial world that appears so typically Danish. It is Bang's art to made the little egoism and the hidden loneliness's unheroical pain recognizable for contemporary readers." I think my summary conveys the intent of the message although I agree that there might be an ambiguity as to what is typically Danish: the portrayal, the bygone provincial world or (probably) a combination of both. I am afraid I cannot answer the question as to when the story was set in relation to the time it was written. I would only say that as it was written in 1886 and has a station master in Jutland as one of the main characters, it must have addressed a more or less contemporary environment. Would you be kind enough to pass these comments on to the reviewer (Wasted Time R), thanking him or her for such careful attention to detail. It's great to have people around who do not blindly accept the sources but actually look into each one. We could do with more of them. --Ipigott (talk) 18:40, 2 February 2013 (UTC)"
"I now see that the reference to awkward language was in connection with the hook. How about "that bygone pains of a woman's loneliness in Denmark's provinces ring true to those reading the novel today?" --Ipigott (talk) 19:24, 2 February 2013 (UTC)"
Apologies Doc, but the hook feels a little clunky. Perhaps it could include the name of the person making the statement? Or perhap we could consider a ALT hook?
I've fixed up a dab in the ALT-labelled hook. But I actually like the original hook idea better, since it is more emotionally alluring; how about
  • ALT3 ... that even though Ved Vejen (cover pictured) was written in 1886, the theme regarding the hidden pain of a woman's loneliness in a Danish province still resonates with today's readership? Wasted Time R (talk) 01:54, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Full support for ALT3. It really conveys the message. --Ipigott (talk) 09:17, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • I agree. ALT 3 feels less clunky and is truer to the original hook. Good to good. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Ved_Vejen&oldid=1031309606"