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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:13, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
... that while Albert Camus is widely considered as an existentialist, he himself rejected the term? Note: the wording has been edited, see discussion below. Sources: A)"Camus, for his part, repeatedly denied the idée fixé that he was an existentialist, just as he refused the label of atheist so often pinned to his breast. He even laughingly planned at one point immediately following the war to co-author a piece with Sartre explaining the differences between them:11 differences which would become all-too-serious after Camus’ publication of L’Homme Révolté in 1951, seeing Camus’ virtual exile from the kingdom of the Parisian rive gauche. All that notwithstanding, Camus continues to be anthologised as an existentialist: “since it is more convenient to exploit a cliché than a nuance, I am a prophet of the absurd as before”.12 And he is taught as such in those classes terminales and sophomoric “introductions to philosophy” that one Sartrean critic (echoing the words of his master, and the assessment of most of the Anglophone philosophical profession since) suggested represent the highest pedagogical level to which Camus’ thought can aspire.13 The almostcomplete critical silence (outside of dedicated ‘Camus studies’ circles) concerning Camus’ philosophical thought from around the time of his death until the fall of the Berlin wall (certainly in the English-speaking world, but mostly also in France) reflects this widespread grouping of Camus with Sartre et al. as an existentialist, if not as a “philosopher of the subject.”" Also see note 11 at same page: "Note11: Albert Camus, “Three Interviews” (“No, I am not an existentialist”), Albert Camus: Lyrical and Critical Essays, edited by Phillip Thody, translated by Ellen Conroy Kennedy (Vintage: New York, 1987), 345. “. . . the only book of ideas that I have ever published, Le Mythe de Sisyphe, was directed against the so-called existentialist philosophers . . .” Source: Camus, Philosophe: To Return to our Beginnings By Matthew Sharpe, page 3 B)Also Sherman 2009 p.3: "Given that “the Absurd,” the notion with which Camus is most often associated, was first devised by the father of existentialism, Søren Kierkegaard, and that Camus is almost universally taken to be at the heart of the French existentialist movement, his persistent claim that he was not an existentialist is rather strange" (and goes on analyzing why Camus rejected the term.
ALT1:... that during the French Occupation by Nazis, Albert Camus had an active role in the resistance as editor of the newspaper Combat? "In late 1943, Camus joined the French Resistance and became active in the underground Resistance paper Combat, which he served as both an editor and a writer (pseudonymously, of course). By early 1944, the handwriting was already on the wall for the occupying Nazi regime, and Camus’s articles, reflecting this state of affairs, are marked no less by a concern with post-occupation political realities than with the realities of the Nazi occupation. The motto affixed to each edition of Combat under Camus was, accordingly, “from resistance to revolution.”" Source Camus, Philosophe: To Return to our Beginnings By Matthew Sharpe page 23
Improved to Good Article status by Cinadon36 (talk). Self-nominated at 09:56, 25 April 2020 (UTC).
Didn't he write a novel about the outbreak of a plague? Wouldn't that DYK attract more viewers in the current situation?--Farang Rak Tham(Talk) 11:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Yeap, that's clever but the article does not discuss that specific novel in depth. Would it still be ok? Cinadon36 16:48, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
No, that's not okay, but why not include it in the article? It does not have to be in depth.--Farang Rak Tham(Talk) 09:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Ok I 'll see what I can do, and I 'll ping you. Cinadon36 18:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Real life is consuming much of my time these days so pls excuse me for the delay. It might take me a week or so to fix it. Cinadon36 07:39, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
@Cinadon36: Yes, I think you could base a DYK item on that. I have been so bold as to rephrase the article a little.--Farang Rak Tham(Talk) 13:06, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your edit, English is not my native language and I am not particularly good at writing. Actually, one of my aims as a WP user is to improve my writing skills. Cinadon36 13:09, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
How about ALT3: ... that Albert Camus based his novel The Plague on an epidemic in Oran, and examined how a government became a tyranny?--Farang Rak Tham(Talk) 11:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Overall: The contents match that of a Finnish website, but it is highly likely that this website copied from this article, and not the other way around. In the main hook, I suggest to change himself to he himself. As for ALT3, this hook I can't review myself, because it was my own suggestion. For now, I am passing the ALT1 hook. Farang Rak Tham(Talk) 12:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
I agree with the proposed suggestion to change himself to he himself. As for ALT3, it is surely more eye-catching and this is an important aspect of any hook of any kind. Cinadon36 13:46, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
@Cinadon36: Of course, I personally like ALT3, but because I proposed it myself, I cannot review it—this is a rule of DYK reviews. For the same reason, you will have to insert the he himself yourself, for me to approve of the main hook. We can ask for a second reviewer to review ALT3.--Farang Rak Tham(Talk) 19:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
The contents match that of a Finnish website, but it is highly likely that this website copied from this article, and not the other way around. In the main hook, I suggest to change himself to he himself. As for ALT3, this hook I can't review myself, because it was my own suggestion. For now, I am passing the ALT1 hook. Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Leaving out as is more idiomatic, but it's correct English nonetheless.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)