Talk:The Black Vampyre: A Legend of St. Domingo

Notes

11/12/2019 Feedback Edit Prose, Add more themes (put religion back in? Obadiah and Gothic texts out of the Caribbean?),

I think your next focus as a group should be on your Analysis section, which has good content but needs some TLC. Right now it feels like a list of disconnected things and needs a bit more coherence. I also wonder if Analysis is the right header. Perhaps you should have two sections: one for Critical Reception and one for Themes? Just a thought. (Nick) --Uncannydazzler (talk) 13:29, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi! As stated on the other page, some of the sections may be difficult or impossible to create as it depends on the availability of coverage and information. This is a general outline of what can be added to the article. I also recommend that you review articles like The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County, [[The Tell-Tale Heart ]], and The Lottery - these articles aren't absolutely complete but they can serve as a good general guideline. Articles on novels can also be helpful - there are obvious differences between short stories and novels but as far as Wikipedia goes some of the basics will be the same as far as formatting and sections go.

Let me know if you have any questions! These are some of my favorite areas to edit on Wikipedia (literature, as well as horror), so I'm familiar with this part of Wikipedia. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:31, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

I think I may have been mistaken when I told you to put The Black Vampire in quotation marks. While it is a short story, it was also a single, self-published manuscript as well (thus a book title). I think it should be italicized, instead, in line with what Duncan Faherty does in his edition of the text. (Nick) --Uncannydazzler (talk) 10:23, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I played a bit with the lead (check changes) and think your plot summary and character list are shaping up nicely. You can spot-check your prose there, of course, but the content is looking good. The areas that need the most work are the context and analysis sections. Right now you have some abstractions (e.g. 'proximity to the Haitian Revolution') that might benefit from being revised into a more specific claim—which should be easy considering you are pulling from a secondary source there. Your section on lore needs a direct relevance to what happens in the text in order to be useful. And your author description needs to be tightened up and edited. (Nick) --Uncannydazzler (talk) 10:36, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Peer review

I peer reviewed your article! Good work. Hbberryhill (talk) 04:18, 12 October 2019 (UTC) Hanna Berryhill

Same, y'all are off to a good start. Bbelliott1875 (talk) 22:15, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

As you may already have noticed that is a citation in your first or second sentence of the article that no longer exists. I read your article and honestly it is packed with information. Personally I found everything easy to follow. I would attempt to make the Characters section flow better, you've bolded the names but also try to simplify the importance of every character. Aeoliver (talk) 23:56, 12 October 2019 (UTC) Andrea Oliver

Other Stuff

• “The vampire concept was also beginning to appear as a metaphor for economic or emotional exploitation” (page 1) • “In a similar vein, D’Arcy makes slavery central to his work, most obviously by making his titular vampire black and specifically an African brought to New World enslavement.” (page 3) • “The Black Vampire draws on this obeah literature to enmesh it with vampirism, sprinkling the already well-established conventions common to representations of obeah throughout its vampire plot.” (page 4) • “The developing dorms of capitalism are emphatically linked with both the vampire’s violence in sucking life from the living and the horror of dead-but-undead institutions.” (page 6) • “vampirism exploring this metaphor, reflecting too on the ostensibly rational origins of the United States that have prompted a different turn to mythology and monstrosity.” (page 7) • The Transatlantic Zombie o “This phenomenon, which transform the zombie’s purpose from an expression of dark fatalism to a narrative of survival, is also spreading worldwide.” o “half rotten people greedily devouring the entrails of their friends; a snarling, blankly vicious look in the eyes of a child.” o Cannibalistic ghoul is a folk tale from Haiti o Which originally represents a slave raised from the dead to labor, who revolts against his masters o Zombie is deeply connected to a colonial and post colonial history of oppression o Comes to America due to occupation on Haiti o Zombie is typically a futile, disempowered figure, the image of a walking corpse hardly seems effective as a figuration of rebellion • Exploiting ignorance, the church was (Catholic) and the wedding the Prince performs Themes Undead During the buildup of the Haitian Revolution, it was not uncommon for the undead to appear in folktales. For example, zombies were prominent undead creatures that appeared frequently during this time because they were “deeply connected to colonial and postcolonial history of oppression.” [Transatlantic Zombie citation] Similarly, vampires served as metaphors for slave revolts.

The text features many variations on the vampire, including ghouls, afrits, vroucolochas, vardoulachos, broucolokas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roshnispatel (talk • contribs) 17:40, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

"Whoever D’Arcy was, he was quick to use vampirism as a metaphor for a number of concerns of 1819 New York" (Didn't know if we could use this quote from one of our sources if we talk about vampirism as a metaphor) - Ashton

Notes (10/24)

Hi! I have some notes:

• Be very careful with sources, as not all sources are considered to be usable. For example, this blog is a self-published source and as such, would not be seen as a reliable source unless it's routinely cited as a reliable source by other reliable sources. Keep in mind that not all Internet search results are usable as sources - the majority of them will actually be unusable as far as Wikipedia goes. Commonplace looks to be good - a look into who put the site out shows that the journal is backed by some reputable organizations, which lend to its reliability.

• Some of the sources aren't actually about the book in and of itself, which poses an issue of original research. The source really needs to mention the story and explicitly state the claims, as otherwise it can be seen as original research to draw ties between the story and various other stories, events, and people.

• Some of the claims are unsourced.

This is good, but there needs to be some caution to resolve and fix the above issues. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:26, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Excellent work..

_signed, Rosguill ^talk 06:31, 30 December 2019 (UTC)