Talk:Liberty 5-3000

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PrimalMustelid talk 16:54, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Anthem heroine Liberty 5-3000 is from a society without any? Source: The one slogan-word that has nothing to do with the collective is "Liberty." Although its adoption by the society was perhaps due to the association with "Equality" and "Fraternity" in the slogan of the French Revolution, its use stands out in a society that has no liberty whatsoever [...] The name Liberty 5-3000, moreover, is the name given to the heroine, from Shoshana Milgram Knapp, "Ayn Rand’s Anthem: Self-Naming, Individualism, and Anonymity", Names: A Journal of Onomastics 64, no. 2 (2016): 78–87, here 83.
  • ALT1: ... that Anthem heroine Liberty 5-3000 is from a society without any liberty? Source: Same as ALT0.
  • ALT2: ... that Anthem heroine Liberty 5-3000 starting a monogamous family with the male protagonist "stands alone" in Ayn Rand's usually love triangle–laden corpus? Source: The name Liberty 5-3000, moreover, is the name given to the heroine, from Shoshana Milgram Knapp, "Ayn Rand’s Anthem: Self-Naming, Individualism, and Anonymity", Names: A Journal of Onomastics 64, no. 2 (2016): 78–87, here 83. And Anthem is somewhat of an anomaly in Rand’s body of work in its representation of gender and reproduction. Liberty is [...] monogamous and reproductive—pregnant by Equality at the end of the novella. This sentimental romance-to-maternity plotline stands alone in Rand’s original fiction, to be replaced later by intensely eroticized romantic triangles, no pregnancies in sight, from Lisa Duggan, Mean Girl: Ayn Rand and the Culture of Greed (University of California Press, 2019), 44.
  • ALT3: ... that scholars have called the heroine of Ayn Rand's Anthem, Liberty 5-3000, "an ideal Randian" and "a frivolous trophy wife"? Source: The name Liberty 5-3000, moreover, is the name given to the heroine, from Shoshana Milgram Knapp, "Ayn Rand’s Anthem: Self-Naming, Individualism, and Anonymity", Names: A Journal of Onomastics 64, no. 2 (2016): 78–87, here 83. And Liberty is described as an ideal Randian imperial subject, from Lisa Duggan, Mean Girl: Ayn Rand and the Culture of Greed (University of California Press, 2019), 44. And By the final chapter, Rand has elevated the penitent Equality 7-2521 to a titan and reduced the once-steely Liberty 5-3000 to a frivolous trophy wife, from Thomas Horan, Desire and Empathy in Twentieth-century Dystopian Fiction (Palgrave Macmillan, 2018), 140.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Well he would, wouldn't he?

Created by Hydrangeans (talk). Self-nominated at 20:59, 10 March 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Liberty 5-3000; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• This article is impressive, Hydrangeans! It is eligible for DYK, and appears to be mostly well-sourced and neutral. There are some offline sources here on which I will need to AGF, but page numbers are provided and I find no copyvio from searchable online sources. The first three hooks are problematic as they rely solely on the fictional content of Anthem. ALT3 is potentially non-neutral, which leads to a problem with the article: the lede asserts that some scholars also consider Liberty 5-3000 an unconquered heroine, but I see no cited support for this ion the body. ALT2 and potentially ALT3 should be good to go once this is resolved. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 21:44, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

• @Ezlev: Thank you for the review! You mention that The first three hooks are problematic as they rely solely on the fictional content of Anthem—does that include ALT2? Since that hook places Anthem in the context of the real-life person Rand's wider corpus, with it being different from most of her usually love triangle-filled stories, is that a hook that involves content outside the fictional story of Anthem? As for the lead problem, I've revised the lead so that instead of saying in wikivoice Liberty 5-3000 is an 'unconquered heroine', it's instead repeating part of the quote calling her "as spiritually unconquered as" Equality 7-2521, quoting the CliffsNotes. In other words, the lead sentence now states, In scholarly analyses, Liberty 5-3000 has been considered a "spiritually unconquered" character who is on par with Equality 7-2521 and a submissive trophy wife who is ultimately passive. And the quotation has a citation note appended to it, the same one as used to verify the statement, with attribution to the author, in the body text. Does that resolve the issue in the lead and make ALT2 and ALT3 good to go? If I misunderstood any part of the problem, do let me know. Hydrangeans (she/her) (talk | edits) 22:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

• Oops, you're correct that I miscounted, Hydrangeans! The first two hooks are problematic. Your fix to that sentence is good. Since it's come up here, I'll note that there is no consensus on the reliability of CliffsNotes but that I'm comfortable with its use in this article, particularly because the writer is a subject matter expert. ALT2 and ALT3 are approved! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 22:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

• Thanks for that heads up and assessment, and thanks again for reviewing! Much appreciate it. Hydrangeans (she/her) (talk | edits) 22:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion 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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Liberty 5-3000/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Hydrangeans (talk · contribs) 21:07, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Kimikel (talk · contribs) 01:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I am going to review this article as part of the October GA backlog drive. I should be done within a week. Kimikel (talk) 01:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

@Hydrangeans: Please see below my initial review of this article. I admit there is very little to address, this is a very well-written article. If you have any questions or concerns regarding my suggestions please let me know. Thank you. Kimikel (talk) 02:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

@Kimikel: Thank you for the prompt review and for the generous assessment of the article. I've made the changes you suggested: "starts wanting" now is "wants"; I removed the paragraph about the character's absence from the "2112" adaptation (I had thought Bowman pointing out Liberty 5-3000's absence was of significance but fair enough that the relevance is, ultimately, that the topic is not in that adaptation), and I've added wikilinks for other publishers (ones that remain unlinked are because they apparently do not have articles or redirects). Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 18:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

@Hydrangeans: Thank you for your prompt and quality work. This was an excellent article, and there was very little for me to address as a reviewer. I am closing this review as a pass, congratulations! Kimikel (talk) 01:49, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Well-written

Very little to nitpick here.

• "starts wanting" > wants
• "Canadian rock band Rush's 1976 "2112" has lyrics reminiscent of Rand's Anthem, a resemblance lyricist Neil Peart described as having happened accidentally.[56] However, Liberty 5-3000 is "decidedly absent" from the song, musicologist Durrell Bowman explains.[57]" > A song not having any reference to the subject of the article doesn't merit mention; I believe it would be better to remove this paragraph entirely.

Verifiable

• Only one of the publishers is wikilinked in the sources; it'd be nice if they all were for consistency's sake

Spot check

1. 58: Verified
2. 66: Verified
3. 64: Verified
4. 61: Verified
5. 63: Verified

Broad

• Broad in its coverage

Neutral

• Neutral

Illustrated

• Images are properly tagged and contribute to article

Stable

• Stable

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.