Talk:William McGonagall

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia The spoken word version of this article is part of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, an attempt to produce recordings of Wikipedia articles. To participate, visit the project page.

Contents

[edit] Awfulness

  • >>>He is renowned as one of the worst poets in the English language.

This a bit harsh, surely? Who's numero uno - Frieda Hughes?

Beth78 16:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

A bit harsh ? Have you read any of his poetry ? It's not just bad -- it's inspired in its badness! Most of us can write bad poetry but the results are normally just boring. It takes a special talent to write poetry so bad that you can't put it down and McGonagall had that talent in spades. -- Derek Ross | Talk 19:53, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I suggest you read some Frieda Hughes. Then we can discuss McGonagall.:P

I do agree that he's quite sublime, but I've seen worse. I mean, was McGonagall totally in earnest or having a laugh? Beth78 11:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

  • McGonagall was COMPLETELY in earnest.

Absolutely right. He was totally in earnest and unable to see the true badness of his poetry. Which is appalling. And very funny. Darkmind1970 14:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

  • All right, but how can you quantify or even measure badness? What's a good poem and what's a bad one? Let's say I thought he was the best poet ever. How am I "wrong"? 68.91.252.41 09:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

"How am I 'wrong'"? Laughably so. :-)138.163.0.42 20:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, calling him "one of" is the real problem, since he is very often identified as "World's worst poet". There's an article about his originals fetching large amounts on the BBC website today,[1] and several earlier links from there. --Stomme (talk) 07:43, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lightning

About 25 years ago, if memory serves, Milligan reported that McGonagall walked 56 miles to Balmoral in his unsuccessful attempt to see the queen, and that on the way he was struck by lightning. Any scholars out there able to confirm this? Man with two legs 14:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Not actually struck with lightning, but at the Spittal o' Glenshee on his "far-famed Balmoral journey" , walking from Dundee, he was caught in "a dreadful thunderstorm" in which "the vivid flashes of the forked lightning were dreadful to behold" and "was drenched to the skin" (quotes from his 'Brief Autobiography' in Poetic Gems). He gives a slightly fuller account in 'The Autobiography' in More Poetic Gems and breaks into typical McGonagallese verse:
On the Spittal of Glenshee
Which is most dismal to see,
…
--Jmc 21:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, but how I wish it had been true! Man with two legs 09:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. I checked the sources given in the article, and while most mention his full name, all use "William McGonagall". Clearly, both names are commonly used, but it appears that "William McGonagall" is slightly more common. -GTBacchus(talk) 08:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

William Topaz McGonagall → William McGonagall — middle name is not necessary in article title as he is better known without it Jw6aa 23:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

[edit] Survey - Support votes

  1. Support per nom. -- Beardo 04:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Support per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). Regardless of whether or not sources give his middle name, "William McGonagall" is how he's usually known. --Blisco 17:59, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Support per gtests below. Patstuarttalk|edits 00:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Support I have only ever seen him referred to as William McGonagall. Darkmind1970 14:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey - Oppose votes

  1. Oppose -- This is movement for the sake of it. He's best known without both of his first names not just the second one. -- Derek Ross | Talk 05:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Oppose -- I have seen him referred to by all three names or by his surname alone but never to my recollection by just William McGonagall (perhaps because William Topaz McGonagall is memorable and evokative of his eccentric role). Sources given with the article use "William Topaz McGonagall " and they are not junk sources that trace back to Wikipedia. House of Scandal 11:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

  • Comment: There are currently two McGonagalls in Wikipedia so there is a disambiguation page there. I didn't propose the move for the sake of it, I think middle names shouldn't be included in the article title for the sake of it. Sometimes the inclusion of a middle name is appropriate, but I don't think this is the case here (we don't move Rupert Brooke to Rupert Chawner Brooke for example). I suspect the article name was changed due to this article William McGonagle but the names have different spellings. (unsigned by Jw6aa)
I have no doubt that your reasons for suggesting this move were as you stated. However that neither changes nor invalidates my opinion that this is an unnecessary move. The article has been named "William Topaz McGonagall" since it was first created in September 2001, well before any articles on other McGonagalls were created, so its title is not a matter of disambiguation. He is generally referred to as "McGonagall", less often as "William Topaz McGonagall", and less often still as "William McGonagall". -- Derek Ross | Talk
"less often still as "William McGonagall""? Jw6aa 18:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
I have to disagree with Derek Ross - I've always known of him as plain William McGonagall. Many sources use his middle name at first mention, as indeed this article does and should, but go on to omit it. (Compare William Jefferson Clinton, a name which is widely known but little used in writing.) A Google for William McGonagall, without quotes, yields a majority of results that don't mention Topaz. --Blisco 17:59, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment According to some amateur Google tests, "William McGonagall" is more common than "William Topaz McGonagall" on the Internet. -GTBacchus(talk) 02:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
    • This has been sitting around for ages. We have 4-2 (including nom), and while it's not a vote, we probably aren't gonna get any close to consensus. Patstuarttalk|edits 04:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
  • The Google test is invalid here. You are getting unrelated people with the same name. House of Scandal 18:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] Reference missing

Reference 6 is missing from the main page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.23.79.210 (talk) 10:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)