Talk:Ennui (sonnet)

Poetry Low‑importance

	Poetry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

POV

I just tagged this article as WP:POV because even though the analysis portion does cite sources, albeit incorrectly, it only cites the most glowing reviews. I would scrap the whole section, but I wanted to see if any senior Wikipedians could weigh in on the issue and offer advice or simply a hand in fixing the article. Ipsenaut (talk) 07:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

interesting

I cannot argue your POV claim. The sonnet is still too relatively unknown. There are few reviews and opinions available to begin discussion with. Since it is protected by copyright, I posted a link to the final draft at blackbird, and a link to Bainbridge's blog about it from 2006, referencing the comments of his blog-readers.

There is only one openly dissenting comment, from "Casselle" who dubs it "Overwrought Juvenalia", yet this sounds as if the comment was made by someone overcome by their own ennui, projecting their own disdain for themselves onto the dead for their failure to entertain or resolve. Eventually, Sylvia Plath resolved her problems. I wonder if Casselle will?

Maybe with access to additional information (like being able to read the sonnet), and a little inflamation, some discussion can be started.208.252.48.158 (talk) 16:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I paused to reflect and I figured it out. Casselle is voicing bathos, and criticising only in mockery. How could I be so dense? (practice, man, practice)208.252.48.158 (talk) 16:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sources

Perhaps a bit more sources would take away from the POV of the article and shift analysis away from personal impressions to a more critical review —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrathel (talk • contribs) 16:38, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

agree. sounds like a grad student citing their own research as monumental —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.178.107 (talk) 03:52, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.blackbird.vcu.edu/v5n2/poetry/plath_s/intro-ennui.htm http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2006/nov/02/plathssonnetofsophisticated. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Enui" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Enui and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 6#Enui until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. eviolite (talk) 00:25, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]