Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1/Archive 1

Notifications not done

FormalDude thank you for the notification, but I am not one of the editors that needs to be notified, and you have not yet notified the WikiProjects listed on talk, and you have not linked any of your notifications here on the FAR, and you have not yet explained which sections require better summary, nor have you given examples of instability. The instructions at WP:FAR explain the steps you should follow; if you don’t understand them, pls ask. Not doing the notifications will add unnecessary time to the FAR, as a certain amount of time is needed in each phase, after notifications are done. You can look at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Chaco Culture National Historical Park/archive1 for what notifications look like; they include all WikiProjects linked on talk, and significant editors as determined by the tools. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:11, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks SandyGeorgia for the explanation, I wasn't aware of the requirement for notifying each associated WP. It looks like an editor has kindly taken care of that for me, or I otherwise would have as soon as I was able. I'll go ahead and provide more detail to my nomination as well. ––FormalDude ^talk 08:20, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Biographies - to cite or not to cite

Moved from Special:PermaLink/1063962063

 – AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 22:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

This may be better suited for the FAR page, but one potential weak point I've noticed on the sourcing for this BLP is the general lack of references to biographies of Rowling. I'm not sure if this is because the existing biographies are poor or because we just haven't referenced them. The ones I can see on the Internet Archive are:

1. J.K. Rowling : a biography by Sean Smith (Michael O'Mara Books)
2. J.K. Rowling : a biography by Connie Ann Kirk (Greenwood Press, an imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group; cited in the article but quite short and seems aimed at children)
3. J.K. Rowling : the wizard behind Harry Potter by Marc Shapiro (St. Martin's Griffin, an imprint of St. Martin's Press)
4. J.K. Rowling : the mystery of fiction by Lindsey Fraser (Argyll Publishing; idk if it's a legit publisher or not)

Most of these are quite short and not all are from publishers I'd completely trust. But a featured article BLP should presumably be citing quality biographies if they exist and not one-off news stories for biographical information. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 20:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

See my comment on the FAR about the relative need to beef up straight bio info (that is, this is her bio, and we have sub-articles on the rest). (PS, Aleatory, you can also raise general questions like this by starting your own section at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1, so that everything related to the FAR will be in one place.) Or, all of the FAR can be kept on this page; hard to know which is best, but splitting is not optimal. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:03, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

I would think its rather early for quality biographies, especially as she presumably hasn't done a deal for an "authorized" one, and her life is once again hitting the headlines. She's only 56 after all. Johnbod (talk) 21:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes, none of them look that great—and some are explicitly flagged as "unauthorised", although that doesn't necessarily indicate low quality, just low approval by JKR/her agent. I wanted to look into this because I was mildly horrified to see her birth date—one of the most basic biographical details and easiest to get exactly right—sourced in this version to a deadlink bio from her American publisher and ""Rowling, J.K.". World Book. 2006", which presumably refers to World Book Encyclopedia, but is remarkably unclear. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 22:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Agree with Johnbod above. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 14:35, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Ealdgyth if you get to a place in the next few days where you can access a computer, could you look at the four bios above and give a thumbs up or down as to whether we should invest any time looking at them vis-a-vis the high quality requirement? Sorry to trouble you when you’re on the road, but there isn’t much out there yet on her. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Okay, the Shapiro book is definitely oriented towards teenagers at best... probably more likely a pre-teen audience. It's from a reputable publisher, but because of its intended audience, I'd not rank it very high. Likewise for the Kirk book - it's got the same intended audience but it is from a reputable publisher. The Smith book is likely the best of the sources, even though it's publisher is a bit more niche. The publisher seems to specialize in bios of popular culture figures, so at least it's in their specialty. The Fraser book is also aimed at children, and it's from a publisher who I've never heard of and doesn't appear to be by a well known biographer. I'd avoid the Fraser. Sorry I can't be more help! Ealdgyth (talk) 16:36, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

The into to Smith says he spent ten years at The Daily Mirror. That suggests material from here should be used cautiously because a) WP:DAILYMIRROR and b) ongoing feud with Rowling. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Oof. The book itself doesn't seem affiliated with the Mirror, though? If we're looking for alternatives, I have found this one, by Connie Ann Kirk, to be pretty good on a second look despite being apparently aimed at kids. (Also, anecdotally, the reading level isn't low enough that it's like a chapter book or anything.) There's also Harry, a history, published by Pocket Books, an imprint of Simon & Schuster. It isn't a biography per se but has lots of biographical info. By Melissa Anelli, who ran (runs?) The Leaky Cauldron. I wouldn't say that's in itself a red flag because it's published by a reputable publisher. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

So far (Chapter 1, making notes in Sandbox, feel free to incorporate to article) I am finding no indication of Daily Mirror negative influence. I think what I am finding is not unduly influenced and appears useful. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:14, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

SandyGeorgia, I remember you mentioning the following dodgy ref somewhere:

"Biography". JK Rowling. Archived from the original on 26 December 2007. Retrieved 7 January 2022.

If it is from an old version of her site, it should be OK as a ref per WP:ABOUTSELF. We also cite

"About". J.K. Rowling. Archived from the original on 23 December 2016. Retrieved 7 January 2022.

which is still live and should presumably say the same thing. Did we settle on what to do about these? AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 17:51, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

It wasn't that it was dodgy; it was that the archived version that was being used didn't go back far enough to cite the text, and she has ditched that old text in newer website versions. So I had set up bio-old and bio-new, to cite the old version vs. the newer version. I think I saw you found other sources anyway? Sorry, I have been up to my eyeballs trying to cite the Bibliography table, and fearing I may need to spring to buy that Bibliography you found, because most of our Wikipedia articles are not actually cited and I am having a hard time finishing the table ... <grrrr ... > SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I've been able to use various biographies online instead of/in addition to the various versions of her official bio, so maybe this isn't really a problem. I can get a copy of OCLC 868038008 at my uni library which is ostensibly re-opening soon. That covers works through 2013 and was published 2015. There's a second edition published 2017 (seems rather soon afterwards) which I can't get for free. Seems like many of the pubs you're trying to ref are post-2013 so the first edition of the biblio may not be much help. I'm still curious to look at it tho ... AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 20:41, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Honestly, after a full day of trying to track down publication dates, and a now-spasming back, I may just spring the $35 to buy that Bibliography online, because that beats being in pain from sitting at computer all day. Normally, I can work from iPad, but I can't edit that table from an iPad, so have had to sit at computer all day, and have made very little progress. I wish I had realized how poor that content was before I converted it to a table. I am hesitating purchasing the online book only because I have never used Google Play.

The state of all of the Potter articles is shocking. Not only is WP:ELNEVER accio-quote.com rife throughout even the FAs and GAs, but a good bit of the text is uncited. I had expected to find the citations I needed in the sub-articles. When trying to find publication dates, you can find lots of "it will be published on x date" or book reviews from x date, but nothing that actually verifies the publication date. And I think I've read the words "it was announced that" about a million times today. The entire Potter suite needs a lot of work.

Also, I can't find anything on her book Very Good Lives: The Fringe Benefits of Failure and Importance of Imagination, which I think very surprising. It seems like it belongs in our table, as her only non-fiction book, but it looks like it may only end up cited to Errington. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:51, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

I just realized we are using Fraser, Kirk and Shapiro, so will replace those with Smith as I start re-working, per notes at User:SandyGeorgia/sandbox6. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:09, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

ah ... we are using a different Fraser ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:12, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Tbh I see nothing wrong with Kirk. It's published by Greenwood Publishing Group and written by Connie Ann Kirk, apparently a known quantity. A short biography, written in high school+ level prose, by a reputable reference publisher for use as a reference—seems high quality to me. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 18:45, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

OK, got it ... basically all of what we have so far is consistent across all sources, except for little bits here and there, like Arantes claiming a different reason for the name Jessica ... and whether the family attended church ... mostly I am finding nothing controversial, but that we can tell just a wee bit more of her story (another clause here and there) as it relates to the effect on her life, choices and writing. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:49, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

PS, worthwhile to park Shapiro in a Further reading section, explaining that it is apt for younger audiences? I think that is a justifiable use of Further reading ... and explains why something in Further reading not used as a source. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:53, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Maybe? Article is so long as is that adding Further reading, which of course will invite all and sundry to add their favourites as well, might be more trouble than it's worth. I was thinking of doing a See also with Outline of Harry Potter, which is one of the few "outline" lists I've seen that's actually useful given how many articles we've got, but the same problem presents itself there. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 19:07, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Proposal to trim "Politics" section

Considering we have sub-articles, below is my proposal to trim the Politics section by 100 words. It covers all the same territory, reduces some WP:PROSELINE, adds WP:NONENG quotes on El Pais, and combines like topics rather than following a chrono order. Unless anyone objects, I will install it later tonight. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:59, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Politics

Draft installed in article, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:08, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
See also: Politics of J. K. Rowling and Politics of Harry Potter Proposed trim (420 words) 6 January version (530 words) Rowling has centre-left political views. In 2008, she donated £1 million to the Labour Party and publicly endorsed Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown (husband of her close friend Sarah) over Conservative challenger David Cameron, praising Labour's policies on child poverty. That same year, in an interview with the Spanish-language newspaper El País, when asked about the 2008 United States presidential election, she said that the outcome would have a "profound effect on the rest of the world". Regarding who she wanted to see elected, she stated that "it was a pity that Clinton and Obama had to be rivals because both were extraordinary". In the same interview, she identified Robert F. Kennedy as her hero. In Rowling's "Single mother's manifesto", published in The Times in April 2010, she criticised then–Conservative Prime Minister Cameron's plan to encourage married couples to stay together by offering them a £150 annual tax credit: "Nobody who has ever experienced the reality of poverty could say 'it's not the money, it's the message'. When your flat has been broken into, and you cannot afford a locksmith, it is the money. When you are two pence short of a tin of baked beans, and your child is hungry, it is the money. When you find yourself contemplating shoplifting to get nappies, it is the money." Rowling stated in 2012 that she is "pro-Union" and would vote 'No' on the 2014 Scottish independence referendum; she donated £1 million to the Better Together anti-independence campaign. She compared some Scottish Nationalists with the Death Eaters, characters from Harry Potter who are scornful of those without pure blood. In June 2016, she campaigned for the United Kingdom to stay in the European Union in the run-up to the 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, stating, "I'm the mongrel product of this European continent and I'm an internationalist." She expressed concern that "racists and bigots" were directing parts of the Leave campaign. In a blog post, she added: "How can a retreat into selfish and insecure individualism be the right response when Europe faces genuine threats, when the bonds that tie us are so powerful, when we have come so far together?" In 2015, Rowling joined 150 others in signing a letter published in The Guardian espousing cultural engagement with Israel. Rowling expanded on her position, stating that although she opposed most of Benjamin Netanyahu's actions, depriving Israelis of shared culture would not dislodge Netanyahu, and that "sharing of art and literature across borders constitutes an immense power for good". Rowling has centre-left political views. In September 2008, on the eve of the Labour Party Conference, Rowling announced that she had donated £1 million to the Labour Party, and publicly endorsed Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown over Conservative challenger David Cameron, praising Labour's policies on child poverty. Rowling is a close friend of Sarah Brown, wife of Gordon Brown, whom she met when they collaborated on a charitable project for One Parent Families. Rowling commented on American politics when she discussed the 2008 United States presidential election with the Spanish-language newspaper El País in February 2008, stating that the election would have a profound effect on the rest of the world. She also said that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton would be "extraordinary" in the White House. In the same interview, Rowling identified Robert F. Kennedy as her hero. In April 2010, an article by Rowling was published in The Times, in which she criticised then Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron's plan to encourage married couples to stay together by offering them a £150 annual tax credit: "Nobody who has ever experienced the reality of poverty could say 'it's not the money, it's the message'. When your flat has been broken into, and you cannot afford a locksmith, it is the money. When you are two pence short of a tin of baked beans, and your child is hungry, it is the money. When you find yourself contemplating shoplifting to get nappies, it is the money." Rowling campaigned for the "No" vote for the 2014 Scottish independence referendum. She donated £1 million to the Better Together anti-independence campaign run by her former neighbour Alistair Darling, the largest donation it had received at the time. In a blog post, Rowling explained that an open letter from Scottish medical professionals raised problems with First Minister Alex Salmond's plans for a common research funding. Rowling compared some Scottish Nationalists with the Death Eaters, characters from Harry Potter who are scornful of those without pure blood. On 22 October 2015, a letter was published in The Guardian signed by Rowling (along with over 150 other figures from arts and politics) opposing the cultural boycott of Israel, and announcing the creation of a network for dialogue, called Culture for Coexistence. Rowling later explained her position in greater detail, stating that although she opposed most of Benjamin Netanyahu's actions, she did not believe the cultural boycott would bring about the removal of Israel's leader or the improvement of the situation in Israel and Palestine. In June 2016, Rowling campaigned for the United Kingdom to stay in the European Union in the run-up to the 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, stating, "I'm the mongrel product of this European continent and I'm an internationalist." Rowling expressed concern that "racists and bigots" were directing parts of the Leave campaign. In a blog post, she added: "How can a retreat into selfish and insecure individualism be the right response when Europe faces genuine threats, when the bonds that tie us are so powerful, when we have come so far together? How can we hope to conquer the enormous challenges of terrorism and climate change without cooperation and collaboration?" References

Discussion of Politics draft

• Thanks much for this. Agree with the trimming with one exception. The "pro-Union" addition is confusing in context because the source looks like it's about the union of the United Kingdom, not the European Union, and the new text seems to replace discussion of the Scottish independence referendum. So it conflates two controversial (dis)unions: the United Kingdom and the European Union. I might delete the last paragraph about Israel because the sources are primary or primary-proximate and it doesn't seem to have made any lasting splash. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!)
• Two minor points. 1) Don't love the one-sentence opening paragraph; suggest combining it with the next. 2) As above, "pro-Union" is confusing; the unfamiliar reader would expect this to mean pro trade-union, or pro-European union, and it means neither. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:43, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  Oops. Will rejig. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Vanamonde93 and AleatoryPonderings:, redone here; please have another look? AP, I hesitate to entirely remove Israel without hearing from others, lest that set off a sensitive issue or an edit war, but if others agree, we might re-consider ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  The Scotland/UK thing is cleared up—thanks. Two small points on a second look. know it's a translation from Spanish and "democrat" is uncapitalized in El País, but wanting a lower-case democrat in the White House (especially these days) is different from wanting a Democrat in the White House. Also, is there a non-contentious link we can add for "cultural boycott of Israel"? The definite article implies that there is a specific one, but it's not clear if BDS movement or another of the boycotts of Israel is meant there. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 20:20, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  On El Pais, because of the way Spanish handles lower and uppercase, we can't be certain what was intended (although the context strongly suggests Democrat). I'll recast that quote to avoid that part altogether, for the absence of doubt. On the "cultural boycott of Israel", I cannot access The Guardian article, but based on other sources I read that are all saying the same thing, it may be better to also rephrase that part to avoid the need for a link, and phrase it instead as supporting cultural engagement with Israel. Will rejig so you can have a new look. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:52, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  Agree with edits. Would suggest using, instead of/in addition to TwitLonger as a cite for the second sentence, the following. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 21:11, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  • Flood, Alison (27 October 2015). "JK Rowling explains refusal to join cultural boycott of Israel". The Guardian. Retrieved 6 January 2022.
  • "J.K. Rowling defends opposition to cultural boycott of Israel". The Times of Israel. Jewish Telegraphic Agency. 27 October 2015. Retrieved 6 January 2022.

  AleatoryPonderings, can you get through The Guardian paywall? I'd much rather use it than the Twitlong that is there, but I can't read The Guardian, so can't be certain it verifies the text. I'd rather not use a Jewish newspaper lest that raise concerns of bias. How about if you switch to The Guardian after I add the text, because then we don't have to do a dance about who can verify that part. Else, you could put direct quotes here ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:17, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  Halfway through this work, I hit my limit on free access to The Guardian ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:18, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  The relevant passages are:

  JK Rowling has spoken out further about her decision not to join a cultural boycott of Israel, saying that while she has “deplored” most of the actions of Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, she does not believe a decision by artists to refrain from cultural relations with the country will force him from power.

  ... Rowling was one of more than 150 signatories to a letter published in the Guardian last week, along with names including Melvyn Bragg, Hilary Mantel and Simon Schama. The letter was written in response to a February missive signed by around 700 artists calling for a cultural boycott of Israel. The letter signed by Rowling cites its signatories’ belief that “cultural boycotts singling out Israel are divisive and discriminatory, and will not further peace”, and that “cultural engagement builds bridges, nurtures freedom and positive movement for change”.

  ... Rowling said yesterday that “a number of readers” had asked for more information about why she signed the letter. She wrote on TwitLonger: “I have deplored most of Mr Netanyahu’s actions in office. However, I do not believe that a cultural boycott will force Mr Netanyahu from power, nor have I ever heard of a cultural boycott ending a bloody and prolonged conflict.

  “If any effects are felt from the proposed boycott, it will be by ordinary Israelis, many of whom did not vote for Mr Netanyahu. Those Israelis will be right to ask why cultural boycotts are not also being proposed against – to take random examples – North Korea and Zimbabwe, whose leaders are not generally considered paragons by the international community.”

  If you clear your cookies the article counter resets to 0, and I say this as a subscriber. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 21:35, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  Good to know :) I see that Victoriaearle is editing now, and because edit conflicts give her an awful time with her health, I'll stop now and wait 'til she stops editing to pop this bit in. Tomorrow I'll do similar with the Press section. Then we might wait until everything else settles and everything is hanging together better with the literary bits before we tackle the Transgender section, and lastly, the Lead.

  By the way, thanks for this after I found that odd statement already in the article. I parked the MEDRS source there, hoping to go back and find the origin of that misinformation (which was not in the FA version), but now you've let me off the hook of going back to do that work :) I doubt that statement ever had any basis, but it seems to be a myth that took hold, with Wikipedia's help. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Will insert this now as I see Victoria is taking a break. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

• The politics section was in really strong need of cleanup/improvement. Great work! Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 23:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks! We are making faster progress than I thought we would, but we'll see how that chop fares. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  I'm terribly impressed as well, that's why I changed my opinion from "delist" to "lets wait and see". Once we're done with the whole content improvement part of the FAR I'll join in and help with the grammar aspect as I tend to be much more helpful in that area. It's certainly very cool to see experienced FA editors go about their business in real-time. Today I was describing why I love the behind-the-scenes curation aspect of Wikipedia to a friend: it's like the Wizard of Oz but the actual magic is behind the scenes! Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 23:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  That's the fun of FAR :) Go lodge some !votes at WP:FASA ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:17, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  I'll wait for the closure of this FAR as I am unfamiliar with the other articles listed, SandyGeorgia. Great award I hope to receive some day :D Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 23:30, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

• Can we get rid of "(husband of her close friend Sarah)"? I don't believe it adds to the readers comprehension of the section, and is already stated in the article. BilledMammal (talk) 10:25, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  That would be fine with me; I was trying not to rock the boat with too many changes at once. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Accio

Collapse of amazing work done by AleatoryPonderings, all done, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Starting a list here: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:20, 6 January 2022 (UTC) She calls herself Jo. Done, [1] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:34, 7 January 2022 (UTC) In 1990, she was on a four-hour delayed train trip from Manchester to London when the idea "came fully formed" into her mind for a story of a young boy attending a school of wizardry. Done. Verifies the "came fully formed" quote in that passage. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC) Mitford became Rowling's heroine, and she read all her books. Done. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:26, 7 January 2022 (UTC) led Rowling to move to Porto, Portugal, to teach English as a foreign language. Done. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:26, 7 January 2022 (UTC) AleatoryPonderings our ships crossed; did I undo what you did in the edit before me? Pls check this one, as I think you changed the named ref. Stopping for the night, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC) Nope, all good (I think) - you just gave it a more descriptive name but it looks like the URL is the good one and not Accio! copyright infringement lawsuit. Maybe the edit conflict was our friend. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:33, 7 January 2022 (UTC) When she reached her Clapham Junction flat, she began to write immediately. Done. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 00:47, 7 January 2022 (UTC) and she channelled her own feelings of loss by writing about Harry's grief in greater detail in the first book. Removed entirely. A mess of a clause for multiple reasons and the ref was not used anywhere else such that it needed preserving for that reason. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC) The couple separated on 17 November 1993. Done, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC) wherever she could get Jessica to fall asleep. Done, mostly by removal. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:37, 7 January 2022 (UTC) Five months later, the book won its first award, a Nestlé Smarties Book Prize. In February 1998, the novel won the British Book Award for Children's Book of the Year and, later, the Children's Book Award. In early 1998, an auction was held in the United States for the rights to publish the novel, and was won by Scholastic Inc., for US$105,000. Rowling said that she "nearly died" when she heard the news. Done. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:48, 7 January 2022 (UTC) Rowling said that she had had a crisis while writing the novel and had to rewrite one chapter many times to fix a problem with the plot. Done. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:59, 7 January 2022 (UTC) In October 1998, Warner Bros. purchased the film rights to the first two novels for a seven-figure sum. Warner Bros. took considerable notice of Rowling's desires when drafting her contract. One of her principal stipulations was that the films should be shot in Britain with an all-British cast, Done. Note that there are two different profile/interviews called "Harry and me": this by Fraser in The Scotsman from 2002 and Treneman's from 2000 in The Times. Treneman's is a proper profile, not just an interview. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 06:39, 7 January 2022 (UTC) Steve Kloves wrote the screenplays for all but the fifth film. Rowling assisted him in the writing process, ensuring that his scripts did not contradict future books in the series. Done. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 23:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC) She told Alan Rickman (Severus Snape) and Robbie Coltrane (Hagrid) certain secrets about their characters before they were revealed in the books. Removed that and a whole bunch of nearby stuff. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:32, 8 January 2022 (UTC) In an interview with Stephen Fry in 2005, Rowling had claimed that she would much prefer to write any subsequent books under a pseudonym, but had previously conceded to Jeremy Paxman in 2003 that if she did, the press would probably "find out in seconds". Removed. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:33, 8 January 2022 (UTC) Rowling has said it is unlikely she will write any more books in the Harry Potter series. Switched to a more recent, more definitive story. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:38, 8 January 2022 (UTC) Rowling relationship with the press is difficult. She admits to being "thin-skinned" and disliking the inconsistent nature of journalism. Reworked, though I'm not that pleased with my new version either. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:51, 8 January 2022 (UTC) Rowling has expressed dislike of the British tabloid Daily Mail, which has conducted several interviews with her estranged ex-husband. As one journalist noted, "Harry's Uncle Vernon is a grotesque philistine of violent tendencies and remarkably little brain. It is not difficult to guess which newspaper Rowling gives him to read [in Goblet of Fire]." Coming up blank on this one. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC) Found it. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:57, 8 January 2022 (UTC) Took care of "Around October 1998, Warner Bros. purchased the film rights to the first two novels for a 'seven-figure sum'." No more hits for "accio" when I control-F the wikitext, so I think this is resolved. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 02:03, 8 January 2022 (UTC) References

@Ben MacDui: in case you are about, I was wondering if you have any means of accessing archives or old print versions from The Scotsman? A lot of text here is sourced to copyright violating reprints from them (they may be happy that we are protecting their copyright :), and if someone could verify the old content by going to The Scotsman, that would solve a number of issues here. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: I don't know that I could access anything more easily than anyone else but I am willing to try. Could you give me the specifics? Ben MacDui 12:30, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Ben; that is most kind of you. But since I pinged you, AleatoryPonderings was able to replace the sources, so we may be OK now. Thank you so much for the offer, and I hope you are well. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:14, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm good thanks but very busy IRL. Stay safe. Ben MacDui 18:54, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Converting Awards and honours to prose

Here's what it might look like: thoughts? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:12, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

See #Discussion: convert awards list to prose

removed query inclusion

Proposed (406 words)

11 January version (375 words)

Initial version 397 words: Rowling was made an officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE) in 2000 for services to children's literature. In 2002, she was named an honorary fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh (HonFRSE) as well a fellow of the Royal Society of Literature (FRSL). For services to literature and philanthropy, she was recognized in 2011 as Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh (FRCPE) and awarded the Order of the Companions of Honour (CH) at the 2017 Birthday Honours. In 2009, Rowling was made a chevalier of the Légion d'honneur by French President Nicolas Sarkozy. She received the Concord Prince of Asturias Award in 2003; the award citation noted that her books promote "imagination as a source of freedom at the service of good and cooperation and solidarity between people". In 2012, she was honoured with the Freedom of the City of London. The British Book Awards named Rowling Author of the Year in 2000. She also won 2006 Book of the Year at the British Book Awards for Half Blood Prince; the 2008 Outstanding Achievement Award; and the 2021 Crime and Thriller Award for Troubled Blood. Two of the Harry Potter novels were recognised as the National Book Awards Children's Book of the Year: Philosopher's Stone in 1997 and Chamber of Secrets in 1998. Rowling's other literature awards include the Bram Stoker Award for Best Work for Young Readers, which she won in 1999 for Prisoner of Azkaban and in 2003 for Order of the Phoenix; and the 2001 Hugo Award for Best Novel for Goblet of Fire. She was the inaugural winner of the Hans Christian Andersen Literature Award in 2010. Rowling has received honorary degrees from the University of St Andrews, the University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh Napier University, the University of Exeter (which she attended), the University of Aberdeen, and Harvard University, where she spoke at the 2008 commencement ceremony. The Harry Potter film series won the 2011 British Academy Film Awards Outstanding British Contribution to Cinema, which Rowling shared with producer David Heyman and members of the cast and crew. Rowling was named the Barbara Walters' Most Fascinating Person of the year in 2007, and on 28 April 2014, she was the first guest editor in over 60 years for BBC Radio 4's Woman's Hour. In 2018, she was inducted into the Science Fiction and Fantasy Hall of Fame. Version 2: The Harry Potter series has won Rowling numerous accolades, including general literature prizes, honours in children's literature and speculative fiction awards. Some scholars feel that its reception exposed a literary prejudice against children's books: for instance, Prisoner of Azkaban was nominated for the Whitbread Book of the Year, but the award body gave it the children's prize instead (worth half the cash amount). The series has won multiple British Book Awards, beginning with the Children's Book of the Year for Philosopher's Stone in 1997 and Chamber of Secrets in 1998, followed by a shift to the more general Book of the Year for Half Blood Prince in 2006. It received speculative fiction awards such as the Hugo Award for Best Novel for Goblet of Fire in 2001. Rowling's early career awards include the Order of the British Empire (OBE) for services to children's literature in 2000. She won the British Book Awards' Author of the Year and Outstanding Achievement prizes over the span of the Harry Potter series. Following the publication of Deathly Hallows, Time named Rowling a runner-up for its Person of the Year, citing the social, moral, and political inspiration she gave her fans. Two years later, she was recognized as a Chevalier de la Légion d'Honneur by French President Nicolas Sarkozy; leading magazine editors then named her the "Most Influential Woman in Britain" the following October. Later career awards include the Freedom of the City of London in 2012 and the Order of the Companions of Honour (CH) in 2017. Academic bodies have bestowed multiple honours on Rowling. She has received honorary degrees from the University of St Andrews, the University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh Napier University, the University of Exeter (which she attended), the University of Aberdeen, and Harvard University, where she spoke at the 2008 commencement ceremony. In 2002, she was named an honorary fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh (HonFRSE) as well a fellow of the Royal Society of Literature (FRSL). For services to literature and philanthropy, she was recognized in 2011 as Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh (FRCPE). Rowling's other works have also received recognition. The fifth volume of the Cormoran Strike series won the British Book Awards' Crime and Thriller category in 2021. The Harry Potter film series won the 2011 British Academy Film Awards Outstanding British Contribution to Cinema, which Rowling shared with producer David Heyman and members of the cast and crew.

In 2009, Rowling was made a Chevalier de la Légion d'honneur by French President Nicolas Sarkozy. In 2002, Rowling became an Honorary Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh (HonFRSE) as well a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature (FRSL). She was recognized as Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh (FRCPE) in 2011 for services to Literature and Philanthropy. Rowling has received honorary degrees from the University of St Andrews, the University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh Napier University, the University of Exeter (which she attended), the University of Aberdeen, and Harvard University. She was the speaker at Harvard's 2008 commencement ceremony. On 28 April 2014, she was the first guest editor in over 60 years for BBC Radio 4's Woman's Hour. Other awards include: 1997: National Book Awards Children's Book of the Year, winner Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone 1998: National Book Awards Children's Book of the Year, winner Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets 1999: Bram Stoker Award for Best Work for Young Readers, winner Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban 2000: British Book Awards, Author of the Year 2000: Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE), for services to Children's Literature 2000: Locus Award, winner Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban 2001: Hugo Award for Best Novel, winner Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire 2003: Premio Príncipe de Asturias, Concord 2003: Bram Stoker Award for Best Work for Young Readers, winner Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix 2006: British Book Awards, Book of the Year, winner for Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince 2007: Blue Peter Badge, Gold 2007: Barbara Walters' Most Fascinating Person of the year 2008: British Book Awards, Outstanding Achievement 2010: Hans Christian Andersen Literature Award, inaugural award winner 2011: British Academy Film Awards, Outstanding British Contribution to Cinema for the Harry Potter film series, shared with David Heyman, cast and crew 2012: Freedom of the City of London 2017: Member of the Order of the Companions of Honour (CH) at the 2017 Birthday Honours for services to literature and philanthropy 2018: Science Fiction and Fantasy Hall of Fame 2021: British Book Awards, Crime and Thriller Award, winner for Troubled Blood

References
References

Discussion: convert awards list to prose

Bram Stoker Award for Best Work for Young Readers is discontinued; should we still carry it on this page?

How important is the Science Fiction Hall of Fame? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

• I made some cosmetic changes and MOS tweaks (MOS:JOBTITLE doesn't just apply to jobs, right?) but otherwise I generally like it. Maybe the honorary degrees could get their own paragraph? And the BAFTA and SF Hall of Fame could go in the last graf, which looks like "miscellaneous awards"? AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 12:44, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Done, thx, have another look? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:21, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Looks good; made some other tweaks. I have no idea how important the Bram Stoker Award is but I note the only source in that article is primary. Similar story for the SF HOF. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 14:03, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

DrKay I don’t know about case on these titles and the proper wording; might you look at the blurb above ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:25, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

@Barkeep49, Vanamonde93, A. C. Santacruz, Victoriaearle, and AleatoryPonderings: depending on what you all think here, I will also post to article talk for broader feedback before installing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:21, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Saving diff in case we do end up creating a separate “List of” article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

No issues with what you include and don't. I do think it's reading a bit like a list in sentence form and would suggest we either lean back into list format or add some "color" Concord Prince of Asturias Award. I do think the current groupings largely work well. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

BK, I am not following your comment to add some color ?? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:53, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Giving some information from the award citation or otherwise providing context beyond that she won it (and for which work). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

I’mADork; I thought you were referring color in tables :) :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:52, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

I didn't know Bram Stoker had been discontinued; I'd suggest keeping Locust. Maybe we can lose Barbara Walters? Mike Christie would know about the sci-fi awards & maybe the others too. Victoria (tk) 20:51, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Within the sf field Locus is moderately prestigious, though it's not the top echelon -- that would be the Hugo and Nebula. In a prose section which includes a mention of an OBE, a Legion of Honour, and a National Book Award I think it could be cut. I'm not very familiar with horror so I can't say how important the Bram Stoker is. I would cut the Barbara Walters, I think. The Hugo award should definitely stay. The SFHOF is if I recall correctly a fairly recent venture (last 20 years or so) and I don't know how much weight is placed on it within the field. If I had to guess I'd say not much, so cut it. Orangemike, I think you're more in touch than I am; can you weigh in? Overall I think if we find ourselves cutting more than marginal items, it might be time to reconsider the separate list article option. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:29, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Mike Christie, that's really helpful. Yes, I agree with your reasoning. Victoria (tk) 21:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: I have a proposal 2 above that adds some color and is arranged thematically. Let me know what you think. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 21:25, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

To all, here is my concern. There was a split discussion on talk which yielded consensus against creating a "List of ... " article. Several editors during the FAR expressed a preference for a "List of ... ", which I am unwilling to create without consensus. But if we want to prune this list, we really should be making the text even more generalized, and hatnoting to a list of article. Without a list of article, how can we partially prune this list and expect it to stay that way? I don't know what to do next; I already re-pinged the article talk page to try to get more feedback. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:01, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, Sandy, I wasn't clear. I think what you've created is lovely and much better than a bullet pointed list. My earlier comment simply had to do with not being sure which are more important than others. Generally I think Locus Award is considered notable; it's certainly one I've heard of and I'd read a book based on it. Anyway, to the larger question as to keep in the article or separate out, my opinion is to keep. These are the hardest sections to control, much easier to control when prosified, and if it's moved it'll be recreated before we know it. I think it would more difficult to maintain as a separate page than as a prosified section in the main article. Victoria (tk) 21:20, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

I will note that much of the consensus said they would reconsider if the section was expanded, so I think having a follow-up RfC on the question would be merited by your expansion via prose. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 21:33, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

We can't have an RfC section by section. Generally listy lists are discouraged in featured articles, so converting to prose is a normal part of the process. Victoria (tk) 21:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Victoria; this section is not worthy of an RFC, which we may find we need if the going gets rough when we tackle more controversial material. And I am intrigued by Olivaw-Daneel’s version (which highlights how pedestrian my prose is :) I would really like to get back to focusing on building the biographical parts of her early life. Could someone else take over finishing up this piece? Maybe sandbox it where all can work on it ? If someone wants to create a separate list page, then they should go back maybe and work in the diff of lesser notable things that were deleted earlier (that is, on the list page, but not here, where we should be using something like Olivaw’s version). But we can’t have a listy featured article, and Olivaw-Daneel’s version is more elegant than mine. I got the ball rolling; now someone else go with it? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:31, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

PS, if you decide to work back in Locus, it needs a source. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:36, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

But Olivaw, please click on the Premio Principe de Asturiuas article to read description of the Concord award … it is beyond literature, which is why I had included the wording to indicate why they tied her books to what that award is actually given for, which is not literature. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:38, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for piecemeal iPad typing; if the Concord wording is fixed, I am quite happy with Olivaw’s version, but the devil is in the detail, as we have varying opinions above of what to include and what to cut. And I agree with Victoria at 21:20 on the prose list here. If someone wants to separately maintain a list, not our issue here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:44, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Since you're I-pad typing, here's the diff to my reply (the first to Mike Christie, the second re prosifying). Also to reiterate that I'm in agreement w/ what Mike wrote here. Victoria (tk) 22:48, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Thx, Victoria … iPad typing and a bit frazzled at the moment :) My inclination was to leave Barbara Walters as it showed some gravitas on this side of the pond. But all of the rest of you are far more familiar with the territory here than I am, so please all … take this ball and run with it and ignore me … except on the Principe de Asturias, as I speak Spanish … that has to be fixed … the Concord is not strictly a literature award, they turned it into that for her. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:56, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Sure, I have added the Asturias citation back. My version is based on Ursula K. Le Guin#Awards and recognition; I agree with comments above that fewer awards, with more "color" about each, is the right direction (and that article may be a good example). But perhaps this is good enough to go into the article for now? It can be pruned there. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 23:02, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

I would be happy to see your version go in as is, but on the other hand, I advise caution and a bit of patience, just because of the colorful history of the article. But if others think it is good to go, then go for it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:13, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

I would wait. I think it can be trimmed down just a teeny bit and any trimming that can be done is a Good Thing. I do like structure. Victoria (tk) 00:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

I trimmed a bit, so here's yet another version to consider: diff. Done for now! Victoria (tk) 00:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

I've added the trimmed version above (+ a few tweaks) and updated the comparison. Couple of highlighted awards (both Andersen and Hall of Fame are recent ventures), but I'm ok with this version. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 02:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

My Spanish-language bias may be showing, but I think the Premio Principe de Asturias por Concord much more important than the Science Fiction Hall of Fame. Also because it’s more than a literature award; it’s a humanitarian award. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

OOPSIE, Olivaw-Daneel I just realized this. We have two significant mentions in the lead that are nowhere in the body of the article, and belong in this section:

From the lead of the article
Time named her a runner-up for its 2007 Person of the Year, noting the social, moral, and political inspiration she has given her fans. In October 2010, she was named the "Most Influential Woman in Britain" by leading magazine editors. References

I think both of those are more significant than either Science Fiction Hall of Fame or the Concord. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:37, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Oops, I misread and thought the opposite so took out the Premio Principe de Asturias por Concord. Sorry about that. Victoria (tk) 14:17, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Added both; I swapped out Hall of Fame and Andersen. No yellow highlights left. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 05:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Olivaw-Daneel I just started reading Pugh (already cited in the article) last night, which covers a lot of ground that I will type up when not iPad typing … we are missing some that may be important. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Additional sources

For 1(b) purposes and just because there's so many it would helpful to keep track of ones we haven't used. Feel free to add. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 02:30, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

• Mamary, Anne J. M., ed. (22 December 2020). The Alchemical Harry Potter: Essays on Transfiguration in J. K. Rowling's Novels. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company. ISBN 978-1-4766-8134-4. OCLC 1155570319.
• Martens, Marianne (27 June 2019). The Forever Fandom of Harry Potter: Balancing Fan Agency and Corporate Control. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108599092. ISBN 978-1-108-59909-2. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 02:30, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

On comprehensive, must we include everything written about Harry Potter and literary analysis in her bio, when all the works have sub-articles? I am concerned that we should be leaving space for the bio parts of her bio. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:39, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Not everything, of course, but it's hard to tell just what the important bits of commentary on HP are without seeing which ones are referenced in other scholarship. Not suggesting that all (or even any) of these books have to be included. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 03:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Sandy's right. I'm about to start crunching down the literary criticism section and we need to work on the bio. It's important to keep in mind that 1 (b) doesn't mean that a sentence or a phrase from everything ever written is used but rather that the main points are addressed. At this point anything added to literary criticism will be made up for by excessive and constant tightening in that section. Adding: really literary criticism and reception (which now contains quite a bit of critical analysis) should ideally be written once the bio is finished. Victoria (tk) 03:56, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

I need at least another full day to digest and summarize what we might need to add to the bio; will write up a summary when done reading Pugh and Smith. For now, I want to rejig Awards and Honours, as it is standing out like a sore thumb. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:02, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Fine by me if additional litcrit is too much. I guess I'll do legal disputes (I am getting a law degree after all, might as well learn about the copyright stuff). AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 04:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

That needs work ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:12, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

To Do List

Victoriaearle I'll summarize my list (and others) so far (not exhaustive, just a start) and take this opportunity to let others know that, because of your eyesight, edit conflicts are very hard on you and ask that you are given space while you are editing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:59, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

• Barkeep49, Vandamonde93, and others are concerned about literary analysis; I see you've reworked AleatoryPonderings' bold addition, and between you VM and Johnbod, am confident this issue can be addressed. Vanamonde93's suggestions here and here.

  We now have 1,900 words of Critical analysis, Reception and Legacy in a 7,700 word article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:33, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

  So I've only reworked the "Themes" section and just now a bit of tweaking to "Characters". Huge thanks to AleatoryPonderings for the material to work with! Without that basis there wouldn't be anything there at all. I think we're about right in the word count range, because there's stuff to trim, (i.e the first para under the "Harry Potter" section header that's uncited and has a couple of inline comments) and the material about the mysteries can almost certainly be tightened. That said, I'd like to add a bit more to the "Characters" section which is almost entirely cited to a single book - or trim it way back. Either way, there's quite a bit in the literature re the heroes "Companions" which should get a sentence or two. These are always the most difficult sections to write and whatever anyone thinks will work is fine with me. So far I've gotten through a fraction of the literature I've retrieved, but you all think it's getting too long/involved/ whatever, am more than open to stopping now. Victoria (tk) 17:24, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

  I wasn't too thrilled with what I came up with on "Characters" either. It was more of: here's a general category of stuff that the sources talk about, and not "I am deliberately going to look for material on characters and fill the section with it". So I support some kind of change there, whether it's mostly adding or removing. I'll see if I can find some good stuff on characters specifically. One source that's underused rn is doi:10.1057/9780230279711, which I believe AC Santacruz flagged for us. I'll see if there's any good chapters in there for "Characters" (which, again, we don't have to retain). AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 19:31, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

  If we want to expand #Characters, I found:

  • JSTOR 26815565
  • Hermione Granger Saves the World (publisher's page, review; this would be one for the library I think, although there's a Gbooks preview)
  • JSTOR 45177617
  • JSTOR 43496554 (not really literary analysis, more using HP as a jumping-off point for philosophical speculation)
  • The great Snape debate (as it turns out this was published by Borders Group, probably as a tie-in for some HP book release, so I feel no pain in removing the mention of the book I added in my initial stab at #Critical analysis) AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 22:39, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

• There is lots of fat and bloat in the text. There is tightening needed everywhere, of the type you have already noticed. Prose tightening and copyediting needs are not unmanageable, and we have plenty on board already who can take that on (you, Z1720, Vanamonde93, Johnbod and others I am less familiar with).

  Also, Vanamonde93 on trimming needs.

  Most of the fat and bloat has now been reduced (with the exception of the Transgender section, best left 'til last), although when we are all finished up here, a final copyedit would be useful. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:33, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

  SandyGeorgia, critical analysis now at 1095 words. That should suffice. Victoria (tk) 03:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

• A lot of the bloat seems to have resulted from WP:PROSELINE; there are entire sections where every paragraph starts with a date, that look like they were added as the news unfolded, and never trimmed or smoothed into a narrative. PROSELINE eliminated. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:33, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
• There are many short choppy paragraphs or sections. No longer, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:33, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
• There is WP:CITATION OVERKILL, where one high quality citation would suffice.

  Addressed except for Transgender section. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:33, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

  generally resolved now, Transgender section separate. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:30, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

• There are two mentions of her friendship with Sarah Brown.

  I am working in sandbox on trimming the Politics section, where I will rework the second mention of Sarah Brown; I'll post a proposal of the trimmed text here when done. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:34, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  See Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1#Proposal to trim "Politics" section. I started there because it is not one of the worst-written sections, so provides a good place to establish a method for dealing with messier sections. Please comment there. I will insert later tonight unless someone objects (and minor tweaks can be made after/if it is inserted). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  Addressed in this edit to trim Politics section. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:59, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

• High quality sources; see WP:METRO. Done, [2] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:50, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
• For discussion: beefing up a bit of her personal bio, while reducing some of the political and views, as those have sub-articles. Just tightening the prose in those sections will make them more manageable, though.

  Beefing up the personal bio has proven elusive because a) much of what was there was breaching WP:ELNEVER with accio-quote links, and b) it seems there is not yet a high quality bio. Not sure what else can be added at this point. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:33, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

  I am (too slowly) still getting through the Smith bio, but it will be possible to beef up her early life. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:32, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

  Bio bits now have beef (and will need trimming on final pass). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

• Could someone get this source to Victoriaearle? No longer needed, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:00, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

I think that's all I've specifically mentioned so far; others please add on. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:17, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

• We should remove and/or replace citations to AccioQuote, which appears to exist solely to host copyvios of interviews with Rowling and other work about her. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 02:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  Yikes. List started at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1#Accio. I can plug away on those. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:38, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  All done, almost all by AleatoryPonderings, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:10, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

• I cannot get her archived About page to load, but it should be compared/updated to https://www.jkrowling.com/about/ (with a check for comprehensive). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:43, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  Sorted here; somewhere along the way, the archived version linked was not the archived version used, and some of the older text could not be verified to the archived version, so I split them. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:44, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

• Heilman's book really needs to be broken out into multiple citations; it's an edited volume, with separate authors for individual chapters. It's a lot of book-keeping that I don't presently have time for. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  If the way I did the Kosaka 2017 citations at Dementia with Lewy bodies#References is acceptable, and if I can gain access to the TOC of Heilman, I can do that work. Let me know, because the way I did DLB is the extent of my sfn technical ability. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  I introduced the cites this way, so it's only fair that I change it if we need to. I wouldn't mind doing it by author, but I don't see the problem of citing to the editor instead. Citing to the editor helps us keep cites to the same book together, the editor's name is the one that bibliographic databases index the book under, and if we cite every chapter we will massively increase the size of #Works cited without any increase in readers' ease of verification. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 17:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  AP, see the way I kept Kosaka (editor) together in the above example at DLB; that is my suggestion as well, and I don't mind doing that work, since you're working on the writing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  Happy to cede the floor to you on this particular bit, if you don't mind :) AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 17:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  Happy to do any grunt work I can :) Will followup on your talk, as I can't view a full TOC anywhere. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:20, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  I've tended to always cite the full chapter, but I think the example from DLB is a fine compromise. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  I think this takes care of Heilman. SG's trick made it super easy. I think I cited some other edited volumes in an early draft of #Critical analysis (or whatever the section title du jour is—seems to have been changing?) which I can tweak with the loc param in the next bit. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 19:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  My fixes to it were rolled back by what I hope was a misclick (that has me stalled in the Philanthropy section, which is a bigger mess than I had realized). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  All done now, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

  Just fixed the ones from Berndt & Steveker and James & Mendlesohn – I think that's everything. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 04:19, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

• I would like citations to twitter to be replaced. If those tweets in particular are what caused controversy, then they ought to be citable to secondary sources; if those tweets in particular did not receive attention from other sources, then us including them is original research. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  If we can leave that 'til the rest of the article is up to standards, it may be more understandable why that entire section needs work. (I had not realized earlier on the extent of the Accio.com problem; glad to see AP making progress on that, but it was an unanticipated setback.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  AleatoryPonderings has a draft up on talk. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:34, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

• I've added a primary source tag to the information about her charity; if secondary sources don't care about its budget, neither should we. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  Confused: the budget is not sourced to self, their mission is, which seems to conform to WP:ABOUTSELF. Let me know how you think we might mention that is the charity that seems to be the umbrella for all the rest ... I can work on that part. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  The tag was misplaced; it's the budget I'm concerned about. It's not an SPS, but it is primary; doesn't establish why we care. Absent secondary sources, I would omit it; the philanthropy section is bloated as it is. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  Got it; will see if I can find something to earmark how much they do, else delete it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Vanamonde93 and AleatoryPonderings: I hope I have now finished cleaning up what was at Philanthropy; have at it. :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:16, 7 January 2022 (UTC) PS, it came in to the FAR at 1,077 words and is now at 417. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

• In the same vein, does anyone know why this statement is tagged? WP:ABOUTSELF, who better to make this statement than herself? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  She later said that she based the character of Hermione Granger on herself when she was eleven.[30][non-primary source needed]

  Pretty sure that was me. Removed the tag and trimmed the sentence a tad. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 23:36, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

• Short choppy sections. Thoughts on merging some of the sections at the top of "Life and career", since rather than expanding those sections, we seem to be shrinking them because of the accio problem and no good bio yet. Instead of what is there now, my suggestion is:

  2.1 Birth and family, 2.2 Childhood and 2.2.1 Education ---> Early life and education

  2.3 Inspiration and mother's death and 2.4 Marriage, divorce, and single parenthood ---> Inspiration and single parenthood SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:23, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  Agreed entirely, I'd meant to work on that a bit but I'm being pulled away by RL. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:27, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  OK, I will do that, but it will also involved using a multiple image to avoid MOS:SANDWICH; the content is too short to support two images, but I don't see where they can be moved. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:33, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

  Done, but got an edit conflict, so will leave any more moving around now to others. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:11, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

• To me, the first two sentences of "Contemporary fiction" in the current version use editorial voice rather heavily. I think we need to be particularly carefuly because of how many people are working on this; even if the use of wikivoice there is justifiable in isolation, where other sections use more in-text attribution, it gives this a lot more weight. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:45, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks, couldn't quite define what's wrong in that section, but am not pleased with it. Will rewrite. Victoria (tk) 13:59, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

  Vanamonde, I've fixed this but happy to hack at it some more if needed. Victoria (tk) 03:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Victoriaearle: I did notice, thank you! It looks fine to me right now. I do think we may have to do some restructuring and copyediting for flow in that section; I think the material is good, but it's been cobbled together rapidly (as you frequently point out), and as a result the narrative is a little confused, IMHO. But we should likely wait a bit on that, until we're sure we have all the material we'd like. Vanamonde (Talk) 03:33, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

  Yep, I agree. It's best to let it percolate for a bit and then come back to it. Victoria (tk) 03:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

• We will need, once prose re-writing is complete, to check chapter citations again. I'm possibly the worst offender with respect to not formatting these correctly, but I've little time for this to begin with, so I'm going to hold off of tinkering for now. Anyone else is welcome to do so, obviously. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Vanamonde93 and AleatoryPonderings: sorry for the repeat ping, but I’m hoping to wrap up this section (#To Do List) so we can send it to archives. AP, you have a JSTOR list above; are those resolved/addressed? Vanamonde, you have two unstruck comments (items to be resolved later); is it OK with you if I move them to the list at the bottom of this page (the 14 Jan section), and archive the remainder of the To Do List section? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

  I never ended up using them but that's because I've used other stuff instead. If I need them again I'll find them, but no one has responded to that bit so I assume they were not useful to others. Archive away. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:38, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Archives

This talk page is over 200KB, mostly because of the large tables in older discussions (not to be alarmed, the Menstrual cycle FAR resulted in three Archive pages). I have set up Archive 1, and propose to archive the following old sections (please speak up if you disagree):

#Notifications not done: when FAR was launched, notifications were not done.

#Biographies - to cite or not to cite: questions about which basic bios to cite (used Smith, Kirk)

#Proposal to trim "Politics" section: first trim of Politics section

#Accio: list of copyright violations the article was hosting, all corrected.

#Converting Awards and honours to prose: a listy Awards section was converted to prose, sub-article created

#Additional sources: some literary sources proposed but not used

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:58, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Agree. It's getting hard to navigate. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 15:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@AleatoryPonderings and Victoriaearle: are we still using #Additional sources or shall I add it to list to archive? It has no commentary since Jan 11, and only the three of us used it … SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

I started it and I don't intend to use it any more, so yes, add that to the pile. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Johnbod, A. C. Santacruz, Olivaw-Daneel, and BilledMammal: who also contributed to those sections and to let them know we are moving towards archiving resolved or unused sections. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Ok by me - maybe update this section with quick links & terse summaries of what was covered. Johnbod (talk) 16:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Will do, once others weigh in. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Fine with me; I also agree with this proposal. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 19:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Could we also merge our various to dos to either a single section or Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1/To do list? I find a central list useful but have been using one of the old "Update" sections to create one, which isn't ideal. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 20:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Having (I think) finally finished chunking in the bio bits, will work on this next. Stay tuned :) I am a bit hesitant to merge people's posts without their permission, so maybe if we just start doing that, it will take hold. (Else people will give me permission to merge their posts to a To Do List ). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

• I'm fine with archiving, FWIW. I agree the to-do lists and updates need to be kept separate. Vanamonde (Talk) 23:02, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Notes from bio reading

I need a sub-section to start putting things as I continue reading bio sketches. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:06, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Rita Skeeter

Rita Skeeter worked in, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:58, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

AP, Rita Skeeter and her relationship with press is on Pugh, page 9. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:06, 13 January 2022 (UTC) Also in Salter, Anastasia; Stanfill, Mel (16 October 2020). A Portrait of the Auteur as Fanboy: The Construction of Authorship in Transmedia Franchises. Jackson, Mississippi: University Press of Mississippi. ISBN 978-1-4968-3051-7. OCLC 1178868864. at p 48: "Throughout her career, J. K. Rowling has had a particularly contentious relationship with the press, and has taken steps to control her own message and narrative dissemination where possible. Her frustration with the press even inspired a character in the Harry Potter universe, Rita Skeeter, whom J. K. Rowling acknowledged was shaped by the feeling of being continually hounded and misquoted by the press ..." AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 02:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC) Excellent. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Birthplace

Birthplace confusion sorted

In case anyone wonders why this is taking me so long, I keep hitting messy situations. Would someone else like to work on this one little piece ? If not, I will eventually get to it. A historical controversy over where she was born is glossed in the article, and should be clarified in footnotes, making use of better sources than we are now. The presence of an inline footnote on the matter indicates that we haven't provided the necessary clarity. The discrepancy between Yate General Hospital on her website, and Chipping Sodbury in sources needs explanation in a footnote. We say: Joanne Rowling was born on 31 July 1965[21] in Yate, Gloucestershire,[22][23] based on JK Rowling's own website which says Yate General Hospital (it does not say the town of Yate). Sources say Chipping Sodbury Scotsman JK Rowling story has her born at Cottage Hospital, Chipping Sodbury Pugh page 2 has her born at Chipping Sodbury General Hospital Smith p. 4 Chipping Sodbury "Yate's elegant neighbor", and has her born at Cottage Hospital, 240 Station Road, Yate, p. 5, with birth certificate reproduced on p. 6 The birth certificate says District Sodbury. The whole mess can be sorted via a footnote using this source, which explains the hospital history: https://books.google.com/books?id=LEnHs53G0j0C&pg=PA110#v=onepage&q&f=false I suggest we might switch was born at a hospital in Chipping Sodbury, bordering on the town of Yate, avoiding naming the actual hospital, and then spell out the whole mess in a footnote. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:47, 13 January 2022 (UTC) This has been bothering me too. I will assemble something. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 19:52, 13 January 2022 (UTC) It is the gazillion little things like this that have me taking so long on this. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:55, 13 January 2022 (UTC) How is this version? I decided to put it in text as opposed to a long, confusing footnote. I think you have Smith open so feel free to add the details from there in my userspace. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 20:18, 13 January 2022 (UTC) I'd rather not make so much of it, since in the past, she was accused of conflating her birthplace to more chic neighborhood, when in fact, it's just a naming issue. I'd much rather build a footnote, based on the google book, explaining the issue/confusion. If we put all that in to text, we are turning it in a bigger deal than it should be. She was born at Cottage Hospital. Footnote: her website says x, but other sources say y. Z book explains the difference as a, b and c. Do we need three footnotes on her birthdate? One is enough-- not controversial, we can use higher quality than Kirk. We have both Pugh and Smith and her own website. Also, I think we know where she was born, it's just how to explain it, so would rather not say it is unclear where she was born. When I have Smith open, does that mean others can't borrow it? If so, should I sign out more often? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:28, 13 January 2022 (UTC) I don't exactly trust this so maybe there is something better that says Yate General Hospital = Cottage Hospital = Chipping Sodbury (General) Hospital. Non-PD internet archive books can only be borrowed by one person for one-hour stints, so others can't access it while you're using it for that hour. Don't waste time by signing in and out all the time—we can wait an hour :) AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 20:32, 13 January 2022 (UTC) I did not know this ... had never used google play before for books. OK, if you don't trust that book, we can dig more, or gloss that part in the footnotes ... or someting. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:33, 13 January 2022 (UTC) PS Smith gives the address at 240 Station Road, Yate ... so I trusted the other google book ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:38, 13 January 2022 (UTC) Also, another reason to avoid a whole paragraph on where she was born is that it can be an early indication to raeders that, oh my gosh, this article is going to be a chore to read! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:44, 13 January 2022 (UTC) PS I wasted a lot of time on similar issue with her father as engineer. He started as production line worker, but did eventually rise. As we trace her clearly middle class background (not rags to riches) with non-college educated parents who wanted her to study something practical so she could get a job rather than become a writer ... all of the little stuff adds up, and I want to be able to tell it correctly. Hence, not typing til I finish reading. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:30, 13 January 2022 (UTC) And I have spent similar time getting to know her mother, who was a book-loving, vivacious, brilliant woman who was very close to her daughters, and instilled the love of literature, which explains a lot about how Jo became so undone with her mother's illness and death, and had to get away to Portugal, and ended up in bad marriage (desperately seeking love). We can use two or three more sentences on things like this, to provide what a bio is supposed to be ... but the devil is in not over doing it ... a clause here and there. We haven't given her childhood its due yet ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:36, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Names

Discussion of whether to include her married name

AleatoryPonderings why are we taking out that she also uses the name Joanne Murray ? [3] Isn’t that important biographical info? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:35, 15 January 2022 (UTC) You can revert but since it's her married name I thought that was common enough that it didn't need to be said. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Not sure I agree on married name bit, since many of us have no such thing ... my one and only name is the same name I was born with :) Except that, when I lived in two different Latin American countries, they forced me to lodge a doble apellido on my national identity documents, so spelling out other names used can matter. I have added this to my notes in sandbox to try to work back in more briefly perhaps. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC) I undid it. Off for most of today, won't be doing anything else with the body text for a while. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 17:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Degree, date, and "major"

Resolved, graduated Exeter 1987, confusion because of year abroad

Another mess for sorting. We say 1986 graduation from Exeter, and Smith says 1987 (which fits with other dates I find). In trying to find an accurate date, I encountered this fine mess. Smith does not say "BA" and it appears that Rowling does not say "French and classics". Need to get to the bottom of this. Every sentence in this article takes hours. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:00, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Rowling does not give a year, but says "French and classics syllabus"; what are "majors" and "degree" called at Exeter? https://www.jkrowling.com/about/ SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Here, she says Modern languages, but then classics (no year). But then here, she says French (no year). Sdkb are you able to tap us into an editor who might help sort this fine mess? Preferably from Exeter? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Ack, that is indeed a mess. Robminchin is one of the WP:HED editors who knows about the UK education system. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 19:23, 15 January 2022 (UTC) There's one in the next room, not an editor, but a person. I'll ask. Probably a French degree but read classics. Depends too on her A levels, if she took them. If she had modern languages then it makes sense to continue those studies at university. I'll take a look at Smith too. Victoria (tk) 20:10, 15 January 2022 (UTC) A-levels are on Smith, p. 81. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:23, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Ok, so the degree is Bachelor of Arts, and because she was in Paris for a year would have had to come back to finish the fourth year at Exeter. Pugh says French and Classics (cited to Kirk). Pugh says she studied in Paris for her third year (that would be French). Kirk says on page 118 says she "took French with the Classics, Greek and Roman studies", that her parents thought a French degree would give her skills as a bilingual secretary, page 44, that she graduated in 1987 after a year studying French in Paris, on page 118. Not sure this helps. It does take a long time to sort all of these out. Victoria (tk) 20:47, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Adding: Smith tells us on page 95 that because of poor grades/attendence, etc. "it was decided that it would suit her better if she dropped Greek and Roman studies for her final two years." So, she received a degree in French, but she did take some Classics (Greek and Roman studies) courses early on. Victoria (tk) 20:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC) OK, so yes to it being a B.A. But other than that, I am still uncomfortable with the whole mess. On everything I check, almost all of the sources are the same, so it matters not if we use Kirk, Pugh, Smith or Joe Bloe. Yes, the third year in Paris is why I thought Smith was right that she graduated in 1987, and Kirk says 87, so why are we finding 86 all over the place? And now with over a week of my head into biographical pages, I trust Pugh less and less (the chapter I have does not tell me who he is citing, I don't have footnotes); everyone seems to be regurgitating the same sources. Unless we do better, we may need to gloss this. She enrolled at Exeter to study French and classics and graduated with a B.A. in French, and leave off the year?? Proposed wording anyone? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:49, 15 January 2022 (UTC) In England a BA is a three-year degree. But, if you go abroad, then it's a four year degree. She took entrance exams in '82 (autumn), enrolled autumn '83, initially took classes in both departments (French and Classics), had to drop Classics in year two, went to Paris in year three, returned and graduated in year four - 1987. That makes sense to me. I will send you notes from Pugh - it's a separate pdf. Re regurgitating; yes, that's an issue. She's very private, there are limited interviews, and she's still young. We might want to mention that biographical material is difficult to find. I think I read that somewhere so might be able to find a source. Also I left a message in your sandbox talk re helping w/ the heavy lifting. I've just ordered an actual book from ILL; going old fashioned. Victoria (tk) 21:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Victoriaearle I'm starting to lose track of my messages everywhere (left a bit of new material for Olivaw-Daneel at the Lists of awards page), and am going out tonight with friends (COVID be damned). May not get caught up 'til tomorrow. Many references to her privacy in Smith. Not sure what to do about date discrepancies. Would you like to write her degree sentence while I am out tonight, and we won't get edit conflicts? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC) Responding to Sdkb's ping. My reading would be that for the subjects she studied 'degree' means BA. As Y mentioned, this is normally a three-year degree but becomes four with a year abroad (which is common for modern languages). The date confusion could then come from writers assuming she did a standard three-year degree, giving a 1986 graduation, without verifying if she took a year abroad. The 1987 graduation dates are likely to be from people who have done their research better – but this is not entirely satisfactory from a Wikipedia point of view. Robminchin (talk) 06:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC) "Hermione Granger Saves the World : Essays on the Feminist Heroine of Hogwarts" says that she "holds a degree in French and Classics from the University of Exeter", but that source is unlikely to be an authority on this matter. BilledMammal (talk) 03:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC) Thanks for checking for it. We sorted it out. She graduated in 1987 with a degree in French. Victoria (tk) 03:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC) Reading Kirk, clearly 1987, we have it right now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Friend Sarah Brown

Resolved, over-emphasis on Sarah Brown no longer in article

When others have a moment, could you read pp. 238–39 of Smith? It sounds like Rowling's first friendship was with Gordon Brown, which led to the friendship with Sarah Brown, but we imply the opposite. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:43, 15 January 2022 (UTC) I would like to find a place for this quote from Smith, p. 238--seems to sum up her passion for her causes, after being a single-mother, seeing her mother suffer with MS, affinity for the vulnerable, et al: Labour Party, Gordon Brown ... when she gave first speech as ambassador for National Council for One Parent Families ... "We should judge how civilized a society is not by what it prefers to call normal but by how it treats its most vulnerable members." SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:32, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Platform 9 3/4

Image caption fixed

The image caption as I edited it at Early life and education is now misleading, and I don't know how to fix it or what source to use. Smith mentions Platform 9 3/4, but I don't believe that is what it was called when Rowling's parents embarked from there, rather based on the fictional aspects and the site of a tourist shop. Is someone able to fix that image caption to explain the why behind the Platform 9 3/4 in the image? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC) Thanks, Victoriaearle, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:15, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Clapham or Clapham Junction

Resolved, Rowling herself stated where she lived

We currently say (about the flat Rowling lived in after university with university friends): When she reached her Clapham Junction flat, she began to write. cited to Nell p. 67 There is Clapham and Clapham Junction, which Wikipedia says is not part of Clapham. Nell p. 49 says Clapham in southwest London Nell p. 67 says Clapham Junction Smith p. 104 says Clapham in south-west London Smith never uses Clapham Junction Wikipedia says Clapham is in south London, and Clapham Junction "forms the commercial centre of Battersea". I will go with Junction per this not so reliable source (and many others that repeat her tweet), unless someone tells me otherwise. Leaving a record of the discrepancy here at any rate. User:Johnbod ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC) Yes, go Up the Junction. St John's Road runs right up to the station. But I'd better summon the oracle. Johnbod (talk) 06:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Smith done, Kirk pending

New section below, nothing here, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:18, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

I just dropped in a chunk of bio; I expect you all will have a jolly time with my prose :) I want to lay the groundwork for how significant her mother's life and death was to her writing, and to sort the "rags to riches" myth, but I know the 700 words I added will require ruthless editing. I hope to do same to the next section tomorrow. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC) Put in the next bit at J. K. Rowling#Inspiration and single parenthood. Will need work, but besides working on my yucky prose, it may be better to wait until Victoriaearle gets her copy of Kirk before deciding what to trim, etc, and figure out new section headings. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC) I have now chunked in everything I intend to from the Smith bio. Victoriaearle is getting her hands on a copy of Kirk. I'm aware considerable trimming and copyediting will be needed, but maybe best done after Victoria works through Kirk. But at least my writing should be checked for gross prose issues and British spelling. We can chop, chop, chop later as we see what Victoria comes up with. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:05, 18 January 2022 (UTC) With Victoria absent, I am reading Kirk online. Easy reading. Nothing different from Smith, but many places where I can remove quoting and attribution, as all stories (Smith, Kirk, The New Yorker, and the two articles from The Scotsman) are telling the same story. Kirk was a year after Smith, so has some things I can better use (eg definitely a 1987 graduation from Exeter). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)