Talk:Junius (writer)

untitled comment

I added some material from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica including the rest of a sentence which ,as it was, was a fragment. People might want to note that the scanned versions of the 1911 EB online are sometimes indifferently edited.Dhodges 21:47, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

(heading added above this comment, for consistency, by: Xover (talk) 16:28, 11 February 2017 (UTC))[reply]

NPOV

The section taken from the EB show a late 19th century view, corresponding rather closely to the Whig interpretation of history, which assumes the virtue of the cause supported by the author of the letters. This was not proper encyclopedic writing even at the time, and is not so today. The exact portion taken from the EB needs to be specifically cited, and some indication given of its characteristic POV. Other views need to be given also . DGG ( talk ) 05:34, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@DGG: Note that I did not immediately recognise which section of the article you're referring to here. A bit more detail may increase the likelihood that a future editor (not me, I'm just passing by) correctly addresses the problem. --Xover (talk) 16:28, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

that is exactly the problem: the section taken from the EB must be indicated exactly by the use of quotation marks or other indicator, and it has not been, One will find the whole EB article at https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclopædia_Britannica/Junius DGG ( talk ) 03:15, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Junius. 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/20070928011631/http://juniusbooks.com/18c_pub.php to http://juniusbooks.com/18c_pub.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:36, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2 March 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to move to "Junius (writer)" and move the current contents of the dab to the basename. I leave it up to other editors to decide what to put on that dab page vs. a potential separate article for the name. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 19:12, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Junius → Junius (letter writer)
Junius (disambiguation) → Junius

– I believe the primary topic is the given name. If this proposal is accepted, then the given name (and maybe surname) entries would remain at the base article, with the rest going back to the dab page. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:57, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. No primary topic (among the writer, the given name and surname, the month, and others). Move disambiguation page to basename. (Also, I think that the writer's article could just be at "Junius (writer)".) Paintspot Infez (talk) 00:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The writer does not quite rise to the level of a primary topic, but pageviews indicate that a name page would also not be a primary topic. The dab page should remain at Junius, especially because of the writer and the band, with the names remaining or split to Junius (name). This article could be at simply Junius (writer) per WP:PRECISE and WP:CONCISE, but no objection to the proposed title. - Station1 (talk) 03:40, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Junius (writer) per others in Category:18th-century English writers since "letter" doesn't appear to be needed and no primary topic per Station1. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:10, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The disambiguation page should take precedence. I also support using the qualifier (writer) instead of (letter writer) for the sake of brevity and because there is a very small chance of confusion. PraiseVivec (talk) 14:10, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:21, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.