Talk:Butcher's Crossing

General Comments

Hey everyone! So I looked at each section and made some suggestions. I didn't change anything because I wanted to wait and discuss it first. If we all agree on the changes I suggested, I would be more than happy to fix it. Overall I think that the page looks really good! Some other things that we should discuss too is the introduction at the top of the page is not complete. What all do we want to include in that section? Also, do we want that info bar on the side of the page? If so, what do we want to include in there? I can make that section when I make the article later today. Abbybeavan (talk) 16:47, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

As for the lead section, I think we should include the location and time/year the novel takes place in. Perhaps we could also include a very brief sentence about what the novel is about. I think a lead section should be able to introduce a reader to what kind of article he or she will be reading, and that includes, even if briefly, what the book is going to be about. Does anyone else have opinions on this? RebeccaGreaney (talk) 18:16, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Rebecca, I definitely agree about the lead section. It looks a little strange as a single sentence, and a little more information would probably be helpful to someone who doesn't need to read the entire article but only wants to know the basics. Kgoldbranson (talk) 21:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Reviews

The review section looks good too! I didn't notice anything in particular that I would suggest changing, but I am not super familiar with how review sections should look. I think it looks clear and is easy to read. What does everyone else think? Abbybeavan (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I think the review section looks good as well. To me, there don't seem to be any personal interjections because most of this section is quoted directly, but this is a good thing. It ensures that we are recognizing that this article is a presentation of the research of scholars/reviewers/journalists etc. RebeccaGreaney (talk) 17:58, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! I also added an Additional Reviews sub-section to the Critical Reception section, which is something that Professor Schuette and I talked about adding in to include some reviews that weren't necessarily a part of the rest of the page. If you guys don't like it I can take it out, but I personally think it might be helpful as an additional resource to anyone curious about the novel or anyone looking for additional resources. Kgoldbranson (talk) 21:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Style

The style section looks good! I think that you need to add a reference to your first sentence that talks about the western style. Also, I feel like there could be a larger focus on how the western style influenced the writing or the characters. I don't think that I read anything specific about it, but perhaps someone else did. Also, this could just be the section that we don't have a lot of details on. Does anyone else have thoughts on this? Abbybeavan (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I didn't find much on style in my readings for this novel, so I can't help you in terms of what else to say in this section. However, as Abby mentioned, perhaps this is just the section that won't be able to be developed as much as others because we don't have enough detail. One suggestion I'd make to you would be to go in and fix the sentence that says, " As well as incorporates ideas of destiny, and Emerson's concept of being one with nature." I don't think this is a complete sentence, and I would have just made an edit and helped you fix it, but just to be clear that I didn't change what you had intended this sentence to mean, I think you should be the one to edit this sentence. Further, the last sentence of this section seems a little bit unclear when there is mention of "the madness that it can come about from being too emerged into one another". It sounds good, but a little confusing, does anyone else feel this way? Please let me know what you all think. Overall, nice job working with the little information you had to go off of! RebeccaGreaney (talk) 18:06, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I read through our article before looking on the Talk Page, so I actually already made the corrections that you suggested during my grammar sweep, Rebecca. Emily, if I changed the meaning at all please feel free to change it back! I just thought it sounded a little broken up so I made small changes to the sentence structure. The section is short, but I think that overall the content is good. Kgoldbranson (talk) 21:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

No it looks good from your edits, but I did change the last sentence a bit so it is hopefully easier to understand now. Edolata (talk) 20:41, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Themes

The themes section looks great! I think there should be a reference after your second sentence. Also, there were some places where I felt like you were making your own inferences, especially with some of your transition words. Abbybeavan (talk) 16:33, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Abby, I'll take a look and see what I can change as far as questionable transition words. Additionally, after my second sentence, the reason why I didn't include a reference was because almost everything I read about this novel noted the presence of nature in the novel in some form or another so I didn't think to reference it in the same why that I would assume that you wouldn't reference the fact that this novel is, in part, about buffaloes. Does that make sense? What do others think? I could go ahead an add a reference if others feel uncomfortable about it as well. Thanks for the feedback. RebeccaGreaney (talk) 18:23, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Whatever changes you made were good, Rebecca! This section looks awesome. Kgoldbranson (talk) 21:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Characters

The characters section looks really nice! I noticed a double reference so I deleted it. I just had some thoughts on this section. In one of Katie's readings, Waggish, the article mentions a girl named Francine who Andrews has a bit of an affair with. If I remember correctly, I think that she influences his thinking in some manner. Do you guys think that we should add her to the character list? Also, at least in my readings, I did not see a big role for Andrew's father. Should we remove him from the list or did someone find a reading that he had some kind of big influence on the book? Lastly, in the sections that I read, it talked about how Miller's motivation for doing this hunt was the promise of lots of money when selling the buffalo hides. I thought that would be a cool thing to add. Abbybeavan (talk) 16:27, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

In my opinion, because the prostitute Francine is included in the plot section, I think she should be added to the character section as well, even if she is a very minor character. I also wanted to comment on Abby's suggestion to remove the friend of Andrews' father: With both J.D. and Francine, I think including them/keeping them is a benefit to our article because we are not experts on this novel. With this in mind, who are we to say for sure how minor of a character someone is? I think the more we can build up the article now, the more opportunity there is for future editors to build off of what little we could find on these secondary characters, and make the choice of whether or not a character is important enough to be included in the section. If anyone disagrees with this, please comment back with your own opinion, thanks! One last note I wanted to make on this section is in regards to the order of the sections in this page. Right now, characters comes after plot, but I was wondering if anyone thought this should be the other way around? I'm only suggesting this because the plot section seems to go into a bit more depth about some characters, so maybe it would be more organized to provide who the characters are first, before delving into what these characters do in the plot. So I would suggest that we flip-flop these two sections. What does everyone else think? RebeccaGreaney (talk) 17:53, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I agree about flip-flopping the Characters and Plot sections. I think it would make the page run a lot smoother, especially since the Characters section is more succinct while the Plot section goes more into depth. If everyone else sees that logic, then I think the change should definitely be made. I'm also in strong support of including Francine the prostitute. She was mentioned in three out of my four articles that I was assigned, which leads me to believe that even if she is a minor character, she is important to Andrews' growth and should therefore be included. Kgoldbranson (talk) 21:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay, thanks so much for all of these comments. I am going to add Francine in the characters list. I was actually conflicted about that in the first place! I do agree that we should keep J.D. just because we all do not know just how important he is. I also think that flipping the plot and characters sections is fine, any decision regarding that is fine with me! Lastly, it should be said that while the characters list may be thin, there is always room for improvements. The character list displayed is the bare minimum for each listed, but for no reason should these stay this way if further analysis were to be done to the list of characters. Lexaalva (talk) 00:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Background

I think that the background looks good! It does a nice job of summing up why Williams wrote this book in the ways that he did. My only suggestion would be to take out the "ironically" part at the beginning of the last sentence. It implies a type of inference that is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Abbybeavan (talk) 16:21, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm agreeing with Abby, the background section looks well written to me. Nice job. RebeccaGreaney (talk) 18:07, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

:I also agree, this section looks good to go! Kgoldbranson (talk) 21:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Plot

Hello Everyone! I am mostly done with the plot summary. It is kind of a rough draft, but I am not sure on the ending or if I got all of the details right. Did anyone read about the ending in their readings that I could read? Also, would someone mind reading the plot section and giving me some feedback. Thanks! Abbybeavan (talk) 20:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Abby! I think you did a great job with this section given the fact that you've never read this novel. I know it was hard for you to find the full plot because you only had bits and pieces of it to put together. That being said, I think you did an organized job of putting the events in an order that seem chronological and it makes sense. I didn't notice anything in what I read that could help you develop the ending part of the plot, so I believe this is something that we can hope future editors with perhaps more knowledge than us, could add to this article. My one suggestion to you would be to maybe expand on the first sentence in your section, specifically when you talk about Ralph Waldo Emerson (What about Emerson does Andrews' become inspired by?) Overall, nice job. RebeccaGreaney (talk) 17:42, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Content wise, this section looks really good! You did what you could with the pieces that you had, and I think it would be fine to publish. If someone who has read the book comes and makes a few edits on things that may be out of order then that's okay. I did notice, however, that there are a few citations that aren't linked to the bottom of the page. Should they be linked or are they left over from an earlier draft? I didn't delete them because I wasn't sure if they you needed them or not, but if they are no longer necessary then we need to make sure they get deleted before publishing. Kgoldbranson (talk) 21:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing that Katie! It was a reference from an earlier version, so I just deleted it. Abbybeavan (talk) 22:08, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Background--Calvin

(Found in Intro) -Written in 1960 -Character William Andrews is inspired by Emerson and Transcendentalist ideals.

(Westword)

-Williams is "enigma" -Served in WWII -Prior to Butcher's Crossing, Williams began reading Westerns, was disappointed with inauthenticity of the genre.

Links: http://www.westword.com/news/sixteen-years-after-his-death-not-so-famous-novelist-john-williams-is-finding-his-audience-5110462 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvinhenninger (talk • contribs) 21:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)