Jump to content

Talk:It's a Good Life, If You Don't Weaken/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 17:41, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


  • "several scenes are in atmospheric pantomime" What does that mean?
    • It's supposed to mean that the scenes jump from panel to panel without dialogue balloons or captions. I've reworded to "several wordless scenes take the reader on an tour of landscapes and cityscapes". Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 21:11, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a self-deprecatory take on themselves" I would have thought self-deprecatory implies themselves- how about something like "a self-deprecatory sense of humour" or "a self-deprecatory perspective" or something.
  • Is Jack "Kalo" Kalloway a real person?
  • "are in atmospheric pantomime" Again, this is a little obscure for a general reader
  • "invites reader identification"- With/of what/whom?
  • "some, such as Scott McCloud, argue" Does your source specifically say that more than one person argues this? If not, just say "Scott McCloud argues"
  • The image caption is a rather difficult read.
  • "along with his thick, bold brushline and compositional sense, though with greater deliberation and restraint.[14] Seth's brushline is simple and organic, yet precise," I think this is a little non-neutral to be saying in Wikipedia's own "voice"
  • "Seth demonstrates the dexterity of his drawing when he produces the Kalo cartoons in a style as derivative of The New Yorker stylists, yet stands convincingly distinct from the art in the rest of the book." Again
  • "In a metatextual twist he discusses his love of this style with Chester Brown in the story that itself is drawn in such a way;[18] Brown expresses his appreciation for such cartoonists but disappoints Seth with his lack of enthusiasm.[15] Seth's use of a real person to comment on Kalo's work makes the fictional cartoonist's existence seem more plausible,[4] as does an actual photograph on the final page purporting to be of Kalo.[19]" I'm afraid I don't follow this, and so I'm struggling to follow the next paragraph too.
  • "provides Seth an opportunity" The real Seth, or the character?
  • "Seth has become one of the most respected cartoonists in Canada; his stature has come to rival that of Chester Brown's, and he has earned higher esteem in literary circles than more popular cartoonists such as Bryan Lee O'Malley" Again, a little non-neutral

I'll stop there, for now, but I may have some more comments later. Interesting topic- I confess I've never been a graphic novel person! Josh Milburn (talk) 18:17, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Second read-through

[edit]
  • "Friends of his appeared in it, most prominently fellow Toronto-based cartoonists Chester Brown and Joe Matt, who also featured each other in their own autobiographical comics." I don't follow.
  • "Seth discovers his own childhood hometown of Strathroy in Southern Ontario was where the Kalo spent his life. Seth contacts Kalo's daughter and learns of the elder cartoonist's life" Repetition
  • "Seth appropriates the sophisticated, jaded satirical mood of Arno's work[12] along with his thick brushline and compositional sense, though with greater deliberation and restraint.[13]" Again, this is a little non-neutral, for me.
  • "In a metatextual twist Seth discusses his love of the New Yorker style with Chester Brown" This is still difficult for the non-specialist to follow.
  • What does "camera eye" mean?
  • "He avoids engaging with her thoughts and interests, and she ends by leaving him." This is unclear.
  • There's some ambiguity in some places as to whether you're referring to Seth the character or Seth the author. Perhaps you could check all mentions of "Seth", and, if at all ambiguous, clarify?

I'm pondering on the non-free images in the article, but, at the very least, both panels require a more detailed "purpose of use" in the rationale, and both should probably be reduced in resolution. The sources all look appropriate. This is coming together nicely. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:31, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm sorry I went and expanded the article in the middle of a review—I suddenly got access to a bunch of sources I couldn't access when I nominated. As for the images—I thought the rule of thumb was less than 500px? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:39, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've never heard that 500px thing; the rule with album covers, at least, is 300px. The general rule would be something like "only as big as it needs to be, and preferably somewhat smaller than the original". Josh Milburn (talk) 17:54, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, I've found when I've screwed up image sizes, there are bots that go around making them compliant—I think I'll wait for one of them to decide it. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:12, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • (talk page stalker) Hope this helps: The rule of thumb is spelled out at WP:IMAGERES, which basically states that the image width x height should be the number 100,000 or less. So for example, 320 x 300 would be good. I'm so much happier now that this confusing area of Wikipedia has finally become un-confusing to me, so much so that I'm sharing what I learned with you guys. Prhartcom (talk) 23:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Third read-through

[edit]

For me, this still isn't quite there.

  • I feel it could be clearer that Kalo is fictional. Could this perhaps be mentioned in the lead?
  • "Seth appropriates the sophisticated, jaded satirical mood,[12] thick brushline, and compositional sense of Arno's work.[13] Seth's brushline is simple and organic, and he gives attention to buildings, landscapes, weather conditions, and other background details.[14]" This still feels too judgmental to be said in Wikipedia's neutral voice.
    • Would it work if I dropped "sophisticated, jaded satirical"? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 06:30, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Looking at the cited source, I'm not even sure where you got that from? The author says: "A great deal of meaning is contained in the surface of Seth’s work, most notably its evocation of the early gag cartoons of The New Yorker. This impression – which is reinforced by the storyline of It’s a Good Life, If You Don’t Weaken – should be understood as a kind of shorthand. What it specifically points to is something in Seth’s drawing style that recalls the work of one of The New Yorker’s most renowned cartoonists, Peter Arno." However, I'm not seeing any of the words you use? Josh Milburn (talk) 16:16, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm still struggling with the paragraph starting "In a metatextual twist...". As far as I can see, "metatextual" is unexplained jargon, and it's currently unclear where the conversation takes place (I'm guessing, from the picture, you're referring to a conversation between Seth's character Seth and Seth's character Chester).
  • In the paragraph starting "A strongly nostalgic", I am left unclear whether you're referring to Seth the character or Seth the artist. Same in the last two paragraphs of the section.
  • "Photographs recur as a motif, such as family portraits in Kalo's scrapbooks or wedding shots in a diner on which dwells." ?? (If this is a product of my copyediting, I can only apologise...)
  • "When Kalo's mother reveals Kalo's choice to give up cartooning, Seth must face the anxiety of his life choices and what the "Good Life" of the aphorism may mean to him[34]—as a mother who has outlived her son yet does not mire herself in the past, she provides an unsentimental contrast to how Seth views and deals with the world.[35]" Difficult to follow.
  • I'm honestly not sold on the use of two panel images, or, at least, not those two. The evocative descriptions of the first two paragraphs of the Analysis section could lend themselves to a non-free image displaying what is discussed there, but I'm not convinced that we need to see pictures of that conversation and that building- important though they are, the use of non-free images is justified by the importance of how something looks, rather than the importance of the topic.
    • I've dropped them. I don't think I can get across what's in the first two paragraphs without including a page, which would be too low-res to be helpful. Those pages are very similar to what's on the cover, anyways, but with freer panel arrangements and more movement (blowing leaves, etc). I've added a couple of images, including one of Seth that his publisher appears to have uploaded sometime last month. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 06:30, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I could provide some more pointers if you're aiming FAC-ward, but if you fix these issues, I'll happily promote to GA status. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A few more bits (note also my reply above):

In terms of looking towards FAC...

  • The plot seems a bit bare-bones at the moment. I wouldn't worry too much about citing the plot to third-party sources- you can just retell the story.
  • The reception and legacy section seems to have more legacy and people talking about the reception than the actual reception. Do we have any reviews written by reputable critics and/or published in reputable publications?
    • I'd love to find more, but coverage of alt comics was pretty limited before the 21st century, unless it was a breakout work like Maus. Occasionally Rolling Stone or Spin would throw in random comics reviews, but I haven't come across such a thing yet. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 00:41, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The structure of the Analysis section works, but it's not great. When you've got that much information, splitting it up may be helpful.

I think a peer review would be a good first step before FAC; though it's rapidly approaching GA-ready, I think there's a bit more to go before it's FAC-ready. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:33, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy that this is about ready for promotion, but a few more quick comments. These might be useful to expand the reception section: Josh Milburn (talk) 16:46, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • This piece is by Rachel Cooke, a notable journalist.
  • This piece, by Chris Ware, reads as follows concerning It's a Good Life: "4. It's a Good Life, if You Don't Weaken by Seth I still remember the day I bought this book, went out to my car and sat looking at it with my engine idling before I realized at least 15 minutes had passed. After Art's Maus it counts among the experiences that I'd cite as being singularly inspirational towards my trying to be more serious and considered as to what a "graphic novel" could be. It's especially hard to believe that it came out in 1996, as it still feels so innovative and beautiful (and it was serialized in Seth's periodical Palookaville years beforehand -- a new issue of which is just out this autumn, I should add.) I love all of Seth's work, from his ongoing Clyde Fans, Bannock, Beans & Black Tea (the incredible book he collaborated on with his father) to his unfathomable cardboard city of Dominion and the books and stories he's been writing around it like George Sprott. My life would be so less worth living without Seth and his artwork as a part of it."
  • Another from The Times. Original publication: The Times (London) // December 1, 2007, Saturday // Worth a thousand words // BYLINE: Neel Mukherjee // SECTION: FEATURES; Books; Pg. 16: "THERE ARE THREE BOOKS of the year. The first is It's a Good Life, If You Don't Weaken, by the Canadian artist Seth (Cape, £ 14.99/offer £ 13.49). A book so quiet that it stills the reader into an enchanted trance, it tells the story of Seth's obsessive search for Kalo, a New Yorker cartoonist from the 1940s, whose works have been lost. // Wrapped in nostalgia, exquisitely drawn in black and white washed over with blue-grey-green, impeccably narrated and full of wry wit, this book about disaffection and the salvation held out by art and the love of art is magical, insightful and, ultimately, transforming."
  • See also GQ magazine. Originally published as GQ // April 2009 // The 20 Graphic Novels You Should Read (After ‘Watchmen’) // BYLINE: Alex Pappademas : Kevin Sintumuang; - with contributions by BECKY CLOONAN // SECTION: BOOKS; Pg. 83 Vol. 79 No. 4 ISSN: 0016-6979: "It's a Good Life, If You Don't Weaken; by Seth; Ignore the title—this is not the indie mope-fest you'd expect. Seth's quixotic, nostalgia-fueled quest to track the life and career of Kalo, an obscure Canadian illustrator he discovers while rummaging through old magazines, leads to some truly poetic observations and ruminations on the fading, dusty world of the '40s and '50s."
  • For FAC purposes, you may want to think about mentioning if its been translated. I know it appeared in Korean, at least!
  • This interview, which may be of interest more generally even if there's nothing for this article, was originally published as in The Globe and Mail (Canada) // May 9, 2009 Saturday // Canada's comic-book hero; His stories dwell on things vaguely remembered. His new graphic novel is about a has-been fifties TV star. Is it any surprise that Gregory Gallant, a.k.a. Seth, wears a fedora, collects Ookpik dolls and uses a rotary phone? James Adams reports // BYLINE: JAMES ADAMS // SECTION: WEEKEND REVIEW; BOOKS / INTERVIEW; Pg. R1
  • A review by Sam Leith: "The hero of this "picture novella" is called Seth. He is a cartoonist, rather depressive and neurotic, who affects round glasses and a fedora and hates modern life. He tends to push women away. He imagines that he'd have been happier in the 1940s or 1950s, but then catches himself imagining it and realises how absurd the idea is. // Seth's brushwork (or nib-work) consciously harks back to the old-style New Yorker cartoonists, and his strips are in retro-style, two-colour format with a blue tone. This tells the story of his infatuation with, and quest to find out more about, an obscure gag cartoonist called Kalo, whose style resembles his own, after spotting one of his drawings in a 1951 New Yorker. // This is classic modern comics hipster stuff: downbeat, introverted, but exquisite of its kind." From: The Daily Telegraph (LONDON) // July 28, 2007 Saturday // Graphic novels // BYLINE: Reviews by Sam Leith // SECTION: BOOKS; Pg. 32

Promoting

[edit]

Ok, I am going to go ahead and promote. I'd say the article still has at least some way to go until it is FAC ready, so I wouldn't recommend nominating it just yet. I think I have pointed at where I'd say some improvement could be made (more reviews, perhaps a more detailed plot, a more structured analysis section), and you may also want to look at filling out more details of the translations (for example, someone who can read Korean could get you the Korean title, and maybe you could look into how the titles translate? Find out more translators? I'm just thinking aloud) and maybe working on the lead a little. Once you've done these things, perhaps a peer review would help you iron out any final creases and find some people who would be ready to support "off the bat" at nomination. I'm sorry this has been such an arduous review- I hope it hasn't put you off the GAC process or this article at all. Anyway, well done on your work so far, and best of luck with future improvement. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:It%27s_a_Good_Life,_If_You_Don%27t_Weaken/GA1&oldid=669821514"