User talk:Fowler&fowler/Mandell Creighton

David Underdown's comment's

"storey", not "story", in British English.
"was likely" used in that way also grates to most British ears.
"teachers", not "teacher's" when talking about preparation for Latin translation
Mandell Creighton is the main subject of the article, so would normally just be Creighton, have just Mandell several times.
Now seems rather a lot about Polly (incidentally, that's not really a nickname, just a standard alternative for Mary, something like "usually known as Polly" would probably be better)
Just "Revd", rather than "Revd." is again more common in British English
The comments like "never looked back", "happiest years" probably need some sort of attribution - did he say this himself at some point?

David Underdown (talk) 15:07, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. This is great! I will incorporate them ASAP. Look forward to more comments from you on the remaining sections (as and when they appear). Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:27, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Personally, I find it overly detailed. What difference is it that hte family grew up in a two storey house? That the family business was located on "the main thoroughfare in Carlisle that connected the city's historic castle to its centre, dominated by Carlisle Cathedral."? What's the point of knowing that he was "Given to restlessness and mischief, he was once tied to a desk's leg to keep him from talking, a punishment that he would later impose on his own children."? Or that "The school was located scenically on a hill across the River Wear from the eleventh century Norman Durham Cathedral. The students were required to attend service in the cathedral on Sundays and holy days, and the high church ceremony there made a lasting impression on young Mandell." Couldn't this be condensed to "The school was located near Durham Cathedral, where the students were required to attend Sunday services. The high church ceremony of the cathedral made a lasting impression on Mandell."? Or that "Founded in 1264, Merton College, the alma mater of Roger Bacon and William of Occam,..." what difference does it make that Occam and Bacon were there, that was over 400 years before this and they aren't historians either. Or that "For most of his time at Merton, he lived economically in attic rooms at the top of a staircase off the college quadrangles, Mob Quad;..." the bit about the staircases isn't required, it's just important that he lived in attic rooms. The whole thing is a bit TOO detailed .. we don't need to know trivia.

something is missing here "however, he did imbue them a sense of independence." With perhaps?

I'm not that impressed that much of this is important to the sense of the man, it's just a relation of information at this point. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:11, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those are all good points. I added them because they made the narrative interesting (for me); in other words, it is easier for me to read something that has interesting but not necessarily relevant details, than when its narrative is optimal. You are right there's probably a lot that is not essential. I will condense it. Thanks! Fowler&fowler «Talk» 03:08, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am now of the view that the remaining sections in the current article need to be rewritten. Not all details are trivial as they appeared at first (to me). For example, living above the shop was important to the von Glehn family who judged the Creightons to be lower class on this basis; this was an enduring sore spot. Similarly, the punishment might be important because Mandell Creighton had very strong views on physical punishment of children. These even involved burning and cutting his own children. There are other issues that need to be considered such as charges of misogyny, homoeroticism, and even homosexuality, as well as charges that he was a religious skeptic (and only religious in a practical worldly sense). So, if you don't mind, I'll do the condensing once I've written the article, and delineated the main threads. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 11:01, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]