Talk:Philip Larkin/Archive 1

Acrid?! 'Unclosing like a hand/You give forever' (Solar)? 'Begin afresh, afresh, afresh' (The Trees)? Not to mention The Explosion, Money ('intensely sad', not acrid). I am curious where this judgement came from. Doubly curious because poetry that was 'acrid' would not be poetry nor like a Larkin collection (least of all High Windows). The prevailing sensation seems to be one of sadness, pain or fear, often shot through with beauty or redemption, with only a few poems that at first sight might show a startling lack of sentiment. Even these (The Old Fools, This Be The Verse) are not simply bilious. --Waring 12:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I see someone deleted the attempt to give both sides of the critical debate on High Windows. Any objections to my reverting to the previous version? Considering that the Independent just a few days ago called the earlier version of the page "A good and fair account" it seems perverse to delete one of the attempts at balance. ND 16:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed this before your recent edit. I agree that balance is important, however I tend to think "acrid self-parody" is a little strong and does smack somewhat of POV-pushing; I think that saying "falling off" is sufficient, and we should probably find a source and put a footnote in. — Stumps 08:25, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

One source for the opinion would be Swarbrick's Out of Reach, though I haven't got a copy handy to pull a quote. ND 06:02, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I've — for now — removed 'acrid self-parody' and added a footnote to Swarbrick. I'd be happy to see stronger language used to illustrate critical perceptions of High Windows, but would prefer to find something we could quote. I don't have Swarbrick's book around at the moment. Does anyone? — Stumps 07:58, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I think that it's fine with the milder "falling-off" & the general cite of Swarbrick's book rather than a direct quote, actually. ND 05:07, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the nonsense about playing squash, Lily Savage and Garth Farm. Mae hi'n amlwg mai coc oen o ffarmwr ydi Guto Jones.

This article is, I believe, scandalously thin for someone of Larkin's importance and stature

Well, go right ahead & add to it--that's what Wikipedia's about. ND 02:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I've added a little to the article: uploading a picture of Larkin; referred to the 2003 survey which named him as Britain's most popular poet and adding some more television programmes he either appeared on or was the subject of, such as Monitor and The South Bank Show. I hope this will help the casual reader unacquainted with Larkin to get a sense of his literary stature. There's another two-part programme from around 1992 but I can't for the life of me remember what it was called. I've got a copy of it on DVD somewhere: I'll dig it out and have a look. Finally I added some more external links, including the newly-founded Philip Larkin Centre at the University of Hull. Error Gorilla 19:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I blame that Andrew Motion. Couldn't he have improved the article a bit while he was here? Csrster 06:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

At this juncture AM is not listed in Category:Notable Wikipedians. - Snowman (talk) 10:59, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Martin Amis also makes the point in his essay collected in "The War Against Cliche" that the way the Collected Poems was arranged hardly helped: eg the fine sonnet Friday Night in the Royal Station Hotel, originally to be found High Windows, is just one page on from the short, rude, and previously unpublished Administration. Once I've got my hands on a copy of the Amis I'll add something. I believe it is rare for a Collected Poems not to follow the ordering of the published collections- confirmation on this matter would be appreciated Almost-instinct (talk) 20:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm planning to expand this article, giving a more solid factual structure and hopefully putting the current contributions in a better light. As one commentator said: this is far too thin for an artist of such standing. I think that both of the main sections could be split up eg: seperating the life from the output, and the critical response from the influence Larkin has subsequently been. I intend to use the Motion biog and the Thwaite edition of the letters, and also the Martin Amis article if needed. If anyone has any futher thoughts or ideas, I would be keen to hear them before I set to work. Thank you! Almost-instinct (talk) 22:02, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Good luck ... I think I have all those refs at hand ... I'll try to keep an eye on the page and will be happy to help out / fine tune / whatever. Stumps (talk) 01:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I've made a start on writing a chronological section on Life and trying to write a chronology for the Work as well. Once I'm finished on this task I will try to incorporate all the existing material. I'm then going to try to seperate the Legacy section into two parts: the reception of his work, and the influence he has had/the meta-text. I'm having trouble thinking up paragraph headings for these: please make suggestions! Almost-instinct 22:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Although I've added quite a lot of material, I haven't added any references yet. I've noted the sentence: WP:Verifiability says: All material that is challenged or likely to be challenged needs a reliable, published source. Every thing I've added - I think - is a firm fact to be found in the Motion biog, the Letters and the Bradford book, and I really can't imagine it being challenged. But I'm a Newbie so please help me out if there's anything you think I need to give a direct reference to. Almost-instinct 09:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Created the Category:Poetry by Philip Larkin, in supercat British Poems

Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 18:34, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

A template has been added saying this article needs additional citations. The article on citations linked to in the template gives the following five reasons for added citations:

3.1 When adding material that is challenged or likely to be challenged

3.2 When quoting someone

3.3 When adding material to the biography of a living person

3.4 When checking content added by others

3.5 When uploading an image

Anyone who feels that, under these rules, something in this article needs citing please be specific. Everything here is verifiable in published sources. Almost-instinct 22:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

The problem is relatively few inline citations, which more directly verify facts. I have now added a different header banner to make this point more clearly, which contains some links to pages about inline citations. Snowman (talk) 08:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

There's a lot of material here, and that's very welcome, and much of it is well done. But I don't think you can totally absolve yourself from citing more specific references or at least acknowledging another PoV. Examples - Larkin's famous Oxford poetry collection is often described as 'idiosyncratic'... by some - who? (IIRC, Larkin tries to say what his ground-rules are in the forward). Larkin could indeed be a poet inspired by the (apparently) trivial - but weddings, tombs, work are not trivial - the comment needs qualifying or clear attribution. Larkin's early work came in for quite a hammering from Al Alvarez in his forward to The New Poetry - does this PoV need reflecting here. (Answer, yes, but with clear attributions...)

We need more care and traceability on these sort of judgements I suggest.(This work will probably be seized upon by thousands of AS students :-)). ... Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 09:09, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I think a lot of these should be in the Motion book which I haven't to hand. Will track it down. There is passing reference to the Alvarez criticsm in the Bradford but I think we ought to find the source itself. Can anybody help here? Bradford also briefly mentions other criticisms. If that's the best we can do I put them in, but again, if someone can do better, that would be good Almost-instinct 13:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The Alvarez is in his forward to The New Poetry which was a Penguin. We used to have 2 copies - I will go look. Bob Linuxlad (talk) 14:02, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Later - not found it yet! My recollection was that AA was particularly unimpressed by the apparently fusty gentility of lines from Church Going like

...Hatless, I take off My cycle-clips in awkward reverence,

and contrasted them with some lines from (IIRC) Ted Hughes' 'The Horses'. Linuxlad (talk) 13:21, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

A lot of the uncited bits of PoV and value judgements have been in this article for a while. Most of them, IMO, would benefit from a touch of rewriting by whoever looks up the references Almost-instinct 12:18, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

On the subject of the "idiosyncratic" and "contraversial" anthology, I find that Motion uses both of these words, so I've added the refs and left them in Almost-instinct 12:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

There may better headings than a series of dates which currently start with "1950 – 1969". Headings might include "Early life", "University student", "Personal life", and so on. Snowman (talk) 10:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I chose these portions because in 1950 he moved to Belfast - and its around then he started to produce what are generally "mature poems" ie ones which appear in The Less Deceived; in 1969 Hull Library was completed and his professional life began to slow down, and this seems to be - though this is POV - reflected in the poems, which generally are about the end of life. Originally I just had "beginning" "middle" and "end" - and only put those because the section was getting unwieldy. Suggestions, please! Maybe these there should be more than three sections... Almost-instinct 13:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I also think the Legacy section needs sorting out but can't quite see the wood for the trees at the moment. Information on how Larkin himself is remembered should, maybe, be seperate from the subsequent influence of the poetry? If this were tighter that would probably encourage those who really know about his influence on later poets to contribute. Any ideas? Almost-instinct 13:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

In the list of poems there are a lot of external links to the poems themselves. This is presumably a breach of copyright? Does that mean that under Wikipedia's rules we should delete the links? Here is the quote from the Copyrights page:

However, if you know that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work. Knowingly and intentionally directing others to a site that violates copyright has been considered a form of contributory infringement in the United States (Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry [1]). Linking to a page that illegally distributes someone else's work sheds a bad light on Wikipedia and its editors. The copyright status of Internet archives in the United States is unclear, however. It is currently acceptable to link to Internet archives such as the Wayback Machine.

Almost-instinct 12:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore I've found that some of the material in this entry was been copied and pasted from

http://www.seaham.i12.com/myers/m-larkin.html

Should these passages be deleted? I came across it when I was trying, fruitlessly, to find a decent source for the news about Monica Jones' will Almost-instinct 22:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Definitely on dodgy ground if the article plagiarises content from another source. Potential copyvios are best tagged, which serves as a warning to editors. You should also list it as a violation on the copyvio notice-board and a specialist editor should then stop by the article and edit out any infringing content - including external links to pages which are themselves prima facie copyvios. Follow the wikis at Wikipedia:Copyrights and you should find the procedure... Dick G (talk) 10:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the following passage on the grounds it has been lifted directly from another website - I've added a link to it. Almost-instinct 12:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

"The place always cheered them both up; Larkin once wrote 'As always, the place worked its spell'. From here they journeyed to the Lake District and elsewhere. The pair occasionally dined out with friends at the Lord Crewe arms in Blanchland, where Auden had stayed with Gabriel Carritt in 1930. Larkin and Monica used to attend the spectacular New Year's Eve 'tar barrel' celebrations in Allendale; and Larkin was, rather uncharacteristically, thrilled by it all."

I've had a good look at the copyright page and had a long think about the links to web pages which give the entire poem: as they're definitely not legit I'm going to remove them Almost-instinct 19:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

On quotations - Would welcome your sharing thoughts here - I usually like to give at least some extract from a poem, but never anything approaching the whole. My recollection is that a guideline is 'up to 10 percent' - anyone confirm?? The trouble is that this is quite limiting for some of PL's shorter stuff.. Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 20:46, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I just removed this sentence from the introduction

He famously labelled Hull as 'Coventry-by-the-Sea'

as if doesn't seem to be very helpful there. If someone can think of a place where it does belong, please pop it back in Almost-instinct 23:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

IP Special:Contributions/86.148.168.43, with no other editing history, changed the place of Larkin's death from "Hull, Humberside" to "Hull, Yorkshire". Since (a) Hull was in Humberside at the time of Larkin's death (b) Hull is not in the current East Riding of Yorkshire (c) Yorkshire doesn't - unfortunately - exist any more, surely this is incorrect, boardline vandalism? Almost-instinct 10:43, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps, call it a "good faith" edit, that might need reverting. I checked the wiki page on Hull, but I do not known much about Hull, and I guess that someone who knows about Yorkshire will see this and edit it soon, so I left it for now. Snowman (talk) 10:52, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

It seems that the East Riding of Yorkshire and Hull are seperate

You are correct in saying that Hull and the East Riding of Yorkshire are separate unitary authorities, but Hull is in the East Riding of Yorkshire for ceremonial purposes. I know that Humberside is detested by most people from the area but as it was correct at the time then we should go with it, unless there is some policy that indicates we go with today's situation but I do not think there is or there would be major problems with lots of articles.. Yorkshire is incorrect both then and now so should not be used, if you want today's position then it should be East Riding of Yorkshire. Keith D (talk) 14:21, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

What about saying both "Humberside (now East Riding of Yorkshire)"? Snowman (talk) 16:28, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good compromise. Keith D (talk) 16:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

It might sound like a compromise, but I was aiming at the best and least confusing wording. I do not know much about Hull and so I prefer not do to this edit. Snowman (talk) 16:55, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds both complete and elegant. As a Yorkshireman I feel duty-bound to look an uncomfortable truth in the face and grasp the requisite nettle. Ow. Almost-instinct 22:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Just a couple of minor questions to address the clarity of the following sentence:

Five years later Monica developed shingles and consequently moved into the Newland Park home; she remained there for the rest of both their lives.

• Did Monica move into the new home because she had shingles, or could "consequently" be replaced with "subsequently"?
• Should the final part of the sentence state that she remained there for the rest of her life since Larkin had died just over 15 years earlier?

--Red Sunset 17:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, not one of my finest sentences. The source was: "She had developed shingles, a condition that could be moderated with drugs but whose sufferers could not be expected to endure without regular care. Within a month she moved permanently to Newland Park." (Bradford 2005, p.255) She not only stayed there for the rest of Larkin's life, but, since he left the house to her, for the rest of her life too. Almost-instinct 17:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

"She developed (Herpes zoster|shingles) and started to suffer from sufficiently bad chronic symptoms to require regular care, and within a month moved to ..." Rephrased to avoid over generalisations about shingles. I guess that the main symptoms was pain - is there a reference for pain, or just suffering? Snowman (talk) 17:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Immediately after diagnosis she was treated in Hull Royal Infirmary and when she was released "she was evidentally too weak and confused to fend for herself" (Motion 1993, p.498) Almost-instinct 18:02, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

PS my reason for putting this information in is that Larkin had always kept himself free of commitments, that he would have the time and space to write; his taking Monica into his home signals his acceptance that the poetry had dried up. Almost-instinct 18:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Almost-instinct, your source's comment about Monica staying in the house for the rest of Larkin's life is superfluous, but it would appear that she did originally move in as a consequence of developing shingles. I suffer recurring bouts myself, but nowadays with modern medical treatments, regular care isn't necessary. Any comments Snowman? Struck comments saved before reading additional remarks --Red Sunset 18:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

To me this sounds like multiple problems. I think I would not normally expect singles or its after effects solely to cause confusion, even before modern treatments. Was she well previously? Patients a discharged from hospitals and prisoners are released from prisons. Snowman (talk) 18:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Motion says it had "... seriously affected her eyesight ... Larkin was extremely anxious about her, thinking she might be about to die ... He told Monica that when she had recovered she must come and live with him ..." Almost-instinct 18:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Shingles can affect eyes - must be terrible without modern treatment. Snowman (talk) 18:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe the sentence in the main text should refer to the distress that both of them had experienced? Almost-instinct 18:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and I think it needs to be something vague unless the exact details, causes and effects are sourced. Snowman (talk) 18:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Neither of the biogs has any real detail so have made a suitably vague edit based on the sentence you suggested above Almost-instinct 19:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I have added the details from various references that you have indicated, but the ref points might need adding. Snowman (talk) 20:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

all the info came from the same page of Motion, so I think that can stand as it is. In the Letters there might be some more detail. I don't have a copy but will investigate when I can. As it stands at the moment I think its fine and fully-sourced Almost-instinct 20:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

It would be good, if we had some images for the page, but I think a lot of the photographs of him are copyrighted. I might be able to get some photos of the house(s) or street(s) where he lived in Coventry. I might go and look to see if there is plaque on a house in the road where he lived in Radford and take a photo of it. Does anyone know where he lived from the age of 5 years? Does anyone have any suggestions for other images? Snowman (talk) 17:20, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Oo, I'm glad you volunteered ... I had been wondering if I might ask you! From age 5 until moving to Wellington in 1943 he lived at 1 Manor Road which Motion calls "a larger detached house close to the city centre" (p.10) Almost-instinct 17:49, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

It is by the station. Is the house still standing or was it demolished, perhaps to make way for the 1970s ring road which is at its northern end? Snowman (talk) 18:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, yes. Demolished in the 60s (also Motion, p.10, in the next paragraph!) Almost-instinct 18:07, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

A photograph of the ring road would go nicely with the main thrust of "Going, going" - "and that will be England gone ... all that remains for us will be concrete and tyres" ;-) Almost-instinct 18:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you know if the Radford house is still standing? I understand that the council have built a memorial in Radford Park, but I have not seen it yet. Snowman (talk) 18:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I think the ref. that is currently footnote number three, a link to a local paper, will give you useful info Almost-instinct 18:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I plan to look for the Radford house when I next go past Radford Park. So where is the "Going Going" bit where you suggest the ring road photos might go. Snowman (talk) 18:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

The penultimate paragraph of the "Creative writings" section (not one of mine). Incidentally I've been thinking that this paragraph could well be expanded; ... I will see if I can find something in one of the books Almost-instinct 19:07, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Would you write in the Manor Road house, if you thing it is relevant, because this page is part of the WP Coventry project. Snowman (talk) 19:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the photograph - perfectly placed Almost-instinct 19:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

The Brynmor Jones Library article has a photo of the library he worked in at Hull University. Keith D (talk) 20:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Library image now linked into the page. Snowman (talk) 09:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

BTW the library wasn't called the Brynmor Jones Library until 1967 and the building was entirely built subsequent to Larkin's appointment in 1955. I think his title was probably just Head Librarian of Hull University. Will try to find the official title. Almost-instinct 10:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Btw I just bought myself the 2003 edition of the Collected Works: the blurb in the inside flap also thinks that he was made Librarian of the BJ Lib in 1955, which goes to show someting about something. But I've checked in Motion, and title is right now Almost-instinct 14:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

How does this fit in the the book and dates on the page "Brynmor Jones Library, 1929–79 (1979)"? Snowman (talk) 16:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Since Hull's Pearson Park was commemorated in the poem "High Windows", IMHO it would be a good idea to add a photo to the relevant section, taken from a similar vantage point to that of Larkin's flat overlooking the park. --Red Sunset 22:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

seconded as strongly as its possible to second something Almost-instinct 23:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Geograph has several images of the park here. but do not know if any of them would be from the area of the flat. Keith D (talk) 23:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Some great pics, but I think we'd need someone with local knowledge to decide the most fitting. However, in the absence of a specific shot, I suppose a general picturesque one would be of benefit as an indication of what inspired Larkin. --Red Sunset 18:04, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

If I get the chance I will try and locate the house over the bank holiday when I will be in the area. I may be able to get a photo from in front of it if it is still there. Keith D (talk) 18:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

The one with a fountain in a lake from page 3 is pretty typical of the park, as far as I can remember from my childhood kicking a football about on the grass, and furthermore has in the background a house typical of the one Larkin lived in. IMO the photo shouldn't be at all exotic, the point being that he was watching ordinary people getting on with ordinary lives Almost-instinct 21:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair comment! Perhaps that would be a suitable one if Keith D doesn't manage to get an ideal shot. --Red Sunset 21:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Back from holiday and have some images that may be suitable, though not that good when viewed full size. You cannot actually see the park from his flat now as there is a row of trees in the way, may be possible in a winter without foliage on them! I have loaded the ones I took here for you to take your pick from. Keith D (talk) 22:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

They're great! I think the picture of the house with the very High Window in question has to go in! Also the view on the pond (the one without the sticks) and also the one of Newland Park with the balcony. I'd forgotten how grand Newland Park is! Almost-instinct 23:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

That is to say the ones entitled "Larkin Flat 1", "Larkin House 1" and "Pearson Park 1" Almost-instinct 23:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I have uploaded them to commons. Please use their commons name, which are slightly more descriptive. Snowman (talk) 23:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for transferring them to commons. Keith D (talk) 11:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I used to upload images to en wiki, but I upload to commons now (providing the license is suitable), and there are a number of helper tools. It can be interesting sorting out and categorizing the images there too. Snowman (talk) 11:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I am on commons but have not really done much over there, mainly loading Geography images. Keith D (talk) 12:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure about having a photo of Pearson Park on the main page; perhaps, Pearson Park could have its own page. Snowman (talk) 13:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Nice work Keith D! I think there is some justification to include a photo of Pearson Park itself since that is what Larkin would have seen from his "high window" on a daily basis, and a source of inspiration. My only question is, assuming that trees were not in the way at that time: would he have been able to see the pond from his flat? If not, then perhaps the caption should somehow be worded to indicate that for clarity. --Red Sunset 19:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

If you don't like the Pearson Park photo there, why not on the High Windows page? I think the trees must have grown up in the 35 years since he moved out: he definitely had a good view for people watching Almost-instinct 22:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Willow trees can grow very quickly. Snowman (talk) 22:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

And one of the radio or tv progs produced about him during his life mentioned that he had a pair of binoculars for looking at the people! Almost-instinct 23:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I am amazed how many birds and ducks there are in the park photograph, but there appear to be zero people shown. Snowman (talk) 00:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I did try to avoid people, but Hull was thinner on people because of the football match at Wembley that took place in the afternoon. Keith D (talk) 00:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I avoid photographing people too, but if they were in the distance or facing the other way, and no individuals are recognizable, I think that it would be acceptable. Anyway, should Pearson Park have its own page? Snowman (talk) 09:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess there should be a separate page for the park as it looks like it would be notable enough and sufficient material is probably available on its history. Looks like there would be too much to go into the Kingston upon Hull page and there are no area pages for Hull as yet. Keith D (talk) 11:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I see that someone has added "Autumn" to the list of works. This is unpublished (by Larkin) poem from 1953 i.e. it could have gone into The Less Deceived if Larkin had wanted it there. So it ought to be moved into the Collected Poems (1988) section of the list. But this brings up an issue: how much of the poetry ought there be listed? The three major collections have their own pages. Should there be a Collected Poems (1988) page - or maybe a List of poems by Philip Larkin page? On this we can list everything:

• The North Ship
• XX Poems
• The Less Deceived
• The Whitsun Weddings
• Uncollected Published Poems
• Unpublished Poems
• Early Poems

Or have a table repeating the contents page and indicating which book/s each poem could be found in? My feelings are

• 1. we shouldn't list every poem on the main page
• 2. We should only list those poems notable enough to have their own page
• 3. If the purpose of the complete list is to help people locate the poems it should be alphabetical
• 4. We shouldn't forget the small number of poems which have come to light since Collected Poems (1988) and which are available in newspaper articles (eg "We met at the end of the party") Almost-instinct 14:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I am glad this issue has been raised. A separate page to list all his works in a sortable (a click to change to alphabetical and chronological sequence) table would be useful. Only the most notable works (or poems) need be included in the main page and also have their own pages. Snowman (talk) 14:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

If you could please put a blank sortable table (I know not how to do these things yet) onto List of poems by Philip Larkin I'll happily fill it in tomorrow evening. How many columns would be needed?

• 1. The title
• 2. The volume it comes from
• 3. Completion date

Column 2 would only need enough space for "TNS" or "TLD" or "HW" or "TWW" or "CP (2003)" or "CP (1988)". The reason for differentiating between the 1988 and 2003 CPs is that this will indicate whether a poem was published by Larkin. So "Aubade" would be "CP (2003)" and "Autumn" would be "CP (1988)" For those handful of poems recently unearthed an individual footnote with appropriate link could be given. Presumably these tables don't need the number of rows to be specified in advance? I'll create the page now Almost-instinct 15:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Suggest copy the style of "Anna May Wong filmography" and this one which is sortable "List of parrots". I am not sure of the exact overall table structure yet and that will depend on its contents, but I have made a start as a suggestion. Suggest getting an appropriate table structure clear before putting a lot of detail in it. Text in boxes can be centred and so on, but I am not sure how to do that without looking it up. Snowman (talk) 15:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Whereabouts should we put the link to List of poems by Philip Larkin on the main page? Almost-instinct 10:45, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh I beg your pardon, it's already there. Next up I'll create The North Ship and add more detail to the pages for the two editions of the collected poems Almost-instinct 10:52, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.