Talk:Jonathan Raban

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jonathan Raban article.
Article policies

Contents

[edit] 3 Apr 2005

Made a start on this article. More details as I can find them. --Fraserspeirs (talk · contribs) 20:49, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 11 April 2007

I am a great fan of Raban's work, particularly with regard to his writing style. I have mainly read his earlier books and, with so little biographical information about him, have attempted to put together a biography (still somewhat limited) gleaned from articles and interviews. I feel that he should have far more prominence in the literary world, particularly in England, than he currently has, since he is one of the best living authors of his generation. All his books are available on Amazon at the amazon.co.uk site Ivankinsman 08:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, this is a well-made article on an author who deserves more readers in my country, too! Being a sailor myself, I particularly liked Coasting and Passage to Juneau. It’s a shame I haven’t got the time (yet) to follow these two up with Raban’s other work. Anyway: As soon as I have the time I would like to translate this article into German and post it on German WIKIPEDIA, where the present Raban entry is a rather measly one. Cheers, 87.161.180.181 14:56, 22 April 2007 (UTC) (Artur Weinhold, Germany)
Excellent and I appreciate the additions you made to the article. Let's hope there will be a wider readership for this fantastic writer! Ivankinsman 10:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 29 April 2007

Daqu (talk · contribs) Removed so-called article that offers no reason for its existence. (I'm sure it has one, but it doesn't belong in Wikipedia until it begins by explaining itself, not Mr. Raban's biography.)

There is a user called Daqu who mindlessly removed the whole article on Raban on 29th April. Can he stop vandalizing Wikipedia's content, especially all the hard work I (and others) have put in to writing this article. i have retrieed as much as I can from the history. Ivankinsman 11:10, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
In Daqu’s “contribution” there is not a single argument for her/his claim that the Raban article does not belong in WIKIPEDIA. So if Daqu does have arguments, we will certainly read them here. Until then, he/she should contribute positively towards an even better article – or stay away.
The same applies to whoever claims that the Raban article is an “advertisement”. This claim looks too much like the axe somebody needs to grind just for the sake of it. I challenge that classification: What are its specific arguments? What specific sentences or phrases to be found in the article “advertise” Raban the author in a commercial sense? The claim is almost too ridiculous to be taken seriously, but, alas, this is WIKIPEDIA.
With regard to the two of Raban’s books I have read (Coasting, Passage to Juneau), it is certainly possible to read and understand them without any biographical information on the person behind the books. So, nobody who is trained to read and understand needs WIKIPEDIA – good writing speaks entirely for itself. But that kind of reading and understanding is available only to the reader who is sufficiently knowledgeable about England in the 1980s, specifically about class distinctions, about Thatcher’s struggle to terminate Britain’s coal mining industry (Germany, without those class distinctions, chose an entirely different – and rather costly, but socially much less antagonizing – way to do that), about regional differences in England etc. etc. A 25-year-old from, say, Cologne or Stuttgart trying to understand Coasting will be thankful for the background information on Raban’s roots, his upbringing and education that is contained in the article; German WIKIPEDIA does not have that information because Coasting has not been translated into German – and probably never will, being the 1980s time capsule that it is.
Similarly, a reader of Passage will certainly understand the book without biographical information on the author – if he knows enough about a Briton’s fascination by America, about the 18th century ideology and motivation behind the Europeans’ “discovery” of North America’s indigenous peoples, and about the specific style of Raban’s writing in Passage, a style that encompasses the objectiveness of quasi-scholarly research and documentation on the one hand and the subjectivity of a modern writer’s ability and willingness to allow elements of his personal life to reflect intellectual as well as emotional experiences and situations on the other. After all, Passage is (also) a book about just that: a passage from one state of being to another. Nobody who does not get to know about the Briton Raban’s becoming a U.S. citizen and about his separation from his wife in the course of his making the Passage will sufficiently understand those aspects of the book. If there is any sense in WIKIPEDIA, an article about Raban will provide that information and, doing so, will try to get beyond the blurb on the cover – as the Raban article here does. -- Artur Weinhold 17:52, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2 May 2007

Jonathan Raban here. I'm flattered by, and grateful for, the work put into this article by its several contributors. May I make a couple--or three--flyspeck points? Missing ISBN number for "Surveillance" is 978-0-375-42244-7. I did an honours degree in English at Hull, not one in English and Drama. Hull U. also awarded me an honorary D. Litt in 2005 (ref: www.hull.ac.uk/05/pdf/aboutus/news/may/index.pdf+Raban+hull+doctorate&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us). Bibliography is a bit incomplete. It misses out "God, Man and Mrs Thatcher" (1989), also three early critical books: "The Technique of Modern Fiction" (1968), Mark Twain: Huckleberry Finn (1968), and "The Society of the Poem" (1971). It'd be wrong of me to edit an article about me, but I'd be happy to see someone else make some or all of these very minor corrections. Best to all, Nabarj 23:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

JR: I see nothing wrong in your editing Wikipedia articles about yourself. In fact, the Wiki bylaws, as I understand, encourage that. Who else knows your life history and (admirable) work better than you do? pulrich (talk · contribs) 02:28, 31 May 2007
Actually, aside from uncontroversial corrections of facts and trivial/cosmetic edits, there is a lot wrong with it, and such behavior can get you blocked from editing ... please see Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for details.
FYI, there is currently a case being debated at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding User:Douglas Carswell, a British Member of Parliament, who made extensive and controversial edits to the article about himself ... Happy Editing! —68.239.79.82 07:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Raban again, with a PS. Artur Weinhold, above on this page, says I'm an American citizen. In fact I remain a British citizen, but have permanent resident status (with a green card) in the U.S.. Nabarj (talk · contribs) 23:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Have made additions to bibliography and amendments to biographical detail. Ivankinsman 14:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Jonathan, having been born in England myself, allow me to quibble a bit: Shouldn't that be British subject, rather than citizen? (Myersdtm 17:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC))

Myersdtm: No, I just checked my passport. Under "nationality" it says: "British Citizen."Nabarj 00:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Jonathan, quite right of course. My passport says the same. I'd forgotten about the Nationality Act and all that. This idea of being a subject rather than a citizen was drummed into my cranium (unfortunately, not to be dislodged) when I was growing up in Surrey. Thanks for taking the time to respond. Love your work! (66.191.160.194 14:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC))

I've no idea why wikipedia signed me out during the above edit. (Myersdtm 14:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC))

[edit] 13 May 2007

Artur - please leave in Waxwings (novel) and Surveillance (novel) and Coasting (book) so that they connect through to the plot summary pages. If you take novel out, they go through to the definitions of these words. Plus, how is the German Wikipedia article coming along? Ivankinsman (talk · contribs) 09:30, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Ivankinsman and all the other Raban collaborators – sorry, I had no intention of destroying any links! I thought the categorizing of Coasting as book was a bit strange. O.K., if it is necessary to link the entry to other WIKIPEDIA articles, I won’t meddle. By the way: Does Waxwings have to come in inverted commas? As a publication in its own right (and not part of a publication), italicization without any inverted commas will surely do. Anyway, I had better stay away from that part of the article. :-))) On the matter of the German WIKIPEDIA article on Raban – sorry, I haven’t got the time (yet). I started a translation of this English-language article before it was abridged two or three weeks ago but stopped all work once it became apparent that something was going on with this article. The last thing I can stand at the present – having to shoulder a larger-than-usual workload in my regular job until early summer – is investing a lot of work in a German Raban article and then finding the English article drastically changed or having to fight the German article through an irrelevancy discussion or some such nonsense. Also, an enlarged German Raban article will have to be based on some research specific to how Raban has been received in Germany; that takes a bit of time. Finally, I would not want to enlarge the German Raban article just on the basis of having read only two of his books. So – the German article will have to wait for a number or reasons! Cheers – Artur Weinhold (talk · contribs) 20:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 30 May 2007

That's cool that Jonathan Raban uses wiki and comments on his biography.
I think he's one of the finest travel writers I've come across and even better than Paul Theroux. "Arabia: A Journey Through the Labyrinth" was superb: great eye for detail and the truly bizarre as well as the idiosyncratic.
If JR reads these notes, I was wondering: while you were at Hull University, did you ever know a John Ure? - Pulrich (talk · contribs) 00:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion/Talk page etiquette

Hello ... I stumbled across this article while doing some WikiGnome cleanups on Waxwings (novel) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs), and felt that you nuggets deserved my 2¢ worth.

First of all, I found this Discussion page unreadable because there were (a) no headings to break up the threads, and (b) no indentations to separate comments from replies ... I started by adding a {{talkheader}} (which is the Very First Thing that you should do when you create a Talk page) ... this provides a Click here to start a new topic link to create meaningful section headers for new threads.

In the absence of any meaningful subject/headlines, I considered things like, Vandalism - page blanked and Comment by the article's subject, but decided to KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) instead ... I used the date of the first comment in each thread as the headers when I broke up the discussions into sections.

Kudos to you all for signing your posts! ... I did not have to use any {{unsigned2}} templates to identify your contributions. :-)

I have modified some of your signatures using {{User}} ... this provides the wikilinks to the user's Talk page and their Contributions ... it just reduces the number of places you have to click to find out this information, and using it yourself is purely a courtesy ... OTOH, using the ":" (colon) for indentation in replies is considered Good Etiquette for being able to follow conversations ... each one used moves your comment one level to the right.

Anywho, I'm going to follow some more "What links here" links in articles related to this author, make some more cosmetic improvements, and then I plan to MOVE ON.

In the mean time, Grasshopper, just remember ... there was a time when I knew even less about this wiki-stuff than you do at this very moment, so don't be afraid to Be BOLD! ... that's how you learn.

Happy Editing! —68.239.79.82 (talk · contribs) 20:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This is extremely poor form

If I were a pleasant, polite person like Jonathan Raban is (I'm not), and I didn't know what Wikipedia was, and I stumbled upon an article about me on the Internet, and all of a sudden I'm being yelled at about Wikipedia policies, I'd be entirely disillusioned. I of course agree that Mr, Raban is a notable person and an entirely suitable subject for an article, and I agree he shouldn't write his own article, but there's no cause to be incivil or unwelcoming. Ben-w 07:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


For the record (Raban here), I checked with Wikipedia before contributing to the Talk page and was assured that it was in order to do so. I wouldn't dream of trying to edit the article itself. In fact I don't feel "yelled at", and think the guidelines set out by USER:68.239.79.82 are entirely appropriate. I'd instinctively distrust any article written or edited by its subject. But I gratefully appreciate Ben W's concern for my injured sensibility, which is probably a lot tougher than he seems to think! Nabarj 20:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)