This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
No, it’s not just about what Baldwin did in Paris. It covers his reasons for expatriating, his other travels, his time in Saint Paul de Vence, his itinerant career and how expatriation related to his writing and artistic method. Critics have recognized the importance of this aspect of his life on his work, as you can see in the references sections. The secondary sources you ask for on this topic are already referenced in the article — out of the 23 references, 15 are secondary sources dealing specifically with Baldwin’s expatriation.
I would have included this material on expatriation in the main article on James Baldwin, but that article is already very long and densely packed (but it does not deal in detail at length with the issue of expatriation in Baldwin’s oeuvre). I have added a ‘main article’ link in the ‘James Baldwin in France’ article linking to the article ’James Baldwin’.Dr Dobeaucoup (talk) 07:01, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
More on why merger proposal is not a good idea.[edit]
The proposed merger does not adhere to Wikipedia guidance on article length. The ‘Baldwin in France’ article (which has more than 1800 words) would overload the ‘Baldwin’ article, which is massive at over 11,000 words. Thus, the combined article would be around 12,500 words. That puts it nearly in the zone where WP guidance on Article Length ( see WP:LENGTH) states that such an article ‘almost certainly should be divided or trimmed’. The current ‘Baldwin’ article’s length is already in the zone, described in WP:LENGTH as ‘probably should be divided or trimmed’. It was after reading this guidance that I decided to write a separate article to begin with.Dr Dobeaucoup (talk) 14:59, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
