Talk:Arithmetic on the Frontier

Proofreading
Based on the above comparisons, giving particular weight to Project Gutenberg (a carefully proofread project), I changed lines 32 and 36. — {admin} Pathoschild 00:22:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

remove link to eulogy
I removed this because I the word linked here I believe is meant to be a derivitive of -ology. As in "the study of"' Biology, Zoology, etc.  I will however make a trip to a local libary which has a copy of "The Reader's Guide" and see what it says regarding this poem.--Birgitte SB  14:23, 23 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Any progress? — {admin} Pathoschild 04:53:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes and no. I went to the university which had a copy of the old Reader's Guide (only 100 were printed so I had never seen one in person before).  However after writing seven volumes of notes on Kipling's prose, the notes on his entire corpus of verse as well as copies of all his unpublished and lesser-published poems are contained in only one volume.  It does not have the sort of detail that his verse is given in the New Reader's Guide (which is a work in progress and hasn't done this poem yet).  So I have some detailed publication information to add and the date it was written; but there were no notes on the content.--Birgitte SB  14:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Spelling of villa(i)nous

 * Discussion started at WS:AN, and moved here for resolution. — billinghurst  sDrewth 02:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Can an admin please correct Arithmetic on the Frontier. In verse 2, "villanous" should be "villainous"; some of the sources referenced omit the i but it must be a typing error. In the same verse, the source I'd consider the most reliable has "after?" not "after", and grammatically there should be a ?. Finally, it should be Category:Early modern poetry, not Category:Poems. Thanks.--Longfellow (talk) 20:37, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * In this regard we would be better off getting a reliable (original?) source and basing it on that, rather than trying to match an agglomeration of sites. That way we have an authoritative basis for what we have rather than what we think best. This is very much why we now prefer the use of scanned images against which to proofread.— billinghurst  sDrewth  01:57, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * villainous villanous villanous all 1890s, though I didn't try to work out whether they were US published or UK published, which is often the cause of spelling variations. In short the version we have is not wrong, it may just be incorrect for some. — billinghurst  sDrewth  02:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Publishing details of original version — billinghurst  sDrewth  02:14, 28 May 2010 (UTC)