Talk:Scary Stories for Young Foxes

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Scary Stories for Young Foxes/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Barkeep49 (talk · contribs) 02:41, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Review

• Right now only 3 of the tales are included in the summary. I would suggest that perhaps all of them should get a 1 sentence description?
• Is there any conclusion to the meta story with the kits? You mention some of them go home as the book continues, but is there any other resolution with the remaining kits or their mother?
• You need a cite in the sentence that has "no anthropomorphized characters" because every direct quotation needs its own in-line cite
• Is there any information in an RS about the illustrations? At minimum you can generally source what medium was used for a book like this
• For a book this widely reviewed you should be able to write a "Themes" section. See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Novels#Major_themes
• Suggest changing reception to "Reception and awards"
• Should note that the Quealy-Gainer review came from the Bulletin (which has an article to link to)
• Did SLJ really not review this book (not speaking about Fuse 8)?
• I see Kirkus already has a review of the sequel. Since it's debatable about whether that will get its own article I'd suggest maybe include something from it here.
• On that front I have also created a redirect for the sequel
• Since this conversation started with you asking for a bit of a peer review, I'm going to include more sources to consider than I normally would. Here a few that I'd consider using:
  • Video interview
  • Blog interview (this seems like it has some info not included
  • Fuse 8 has some other work on this book that could help form the "missing" themes section noted above. The reviews you've linked already also will have info you can use for that section
  • Reaction interview - I like to include a sentence about author reaction to winning in Reception and awards

Discussion

Thanks, Barkeep49! I'll look over the review tonight and apply the changes where necessary and leave my comments to each bullet point in here. Isabelle ^🔔 21:55, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

• Points 1 and 2 (plot expansion and payoff):
  • I've now managed to expand the plot section to contain all eight tales. I usually avoid doing that for bigger books for aesthetic reasons, but I'm hoping that by improving the other sections this won't look so extensive. Still, I tried to reduce its size as much as possible while retaining all the important sections of the plot. Concerning the payoff of the listeners, indeed that was missing and I'm glad you reminded me of it. I moved that information to compose only the very beginning and end, and I believe I showed its importance to the plot.
    • I think you might be right it's a little long. Anyway to do most of the stories in a single sentence? Also can you do a proofread of the final paragraph? It doesn't quite make sense yet. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
      • I've managed to cut a decent chunk of the plot while retaining the important parts. Hopefully this will do. Isabelle ^🔔 18:02, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
• Point 3 (in-line citation):
  • I hadn't added it before because it comes from the same ref that is attached to next sentence [1], and I avoid adding in-line refs to consecutive sentences (although, ironically, I did do just that in the previous paragraph, haha). Since this is a direct quotation, I understand the importance of having a citation, so that will be fixed.
    • I like the 1 cite per sentence rule since sentences get moved/added/changed but certainly understand why others try to minimize the number of cites. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
• Points 4 and 5 (RS for illustration and themes section):
  • I did search for it and even tried to see if I could find enough information about the illustrator to create her own article. I remember seeing some information about the use of charcoal somewhere, but can't remember exactly why I did not add it to the article. I will do some more research and see what I can find. Same for the "Themes" section: might be able to use the reviews, but I don't recall articles going over this specifically.
    • I think you're right to not want to use this review in reception but I have not received push back in the past about using this kind of source (and sometimes Fuse 8 itself) for themes and find it an RS for that. That said maybe turn this into a writing section because I'm not sure the article goes into appropriate depth about this book as horror which seems to be remarked upon by all RS and has some analysis for how it's achieved. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
      • I've added that review as a source to some sentences for the "Major themes" and "Style" sections, which I tried to keep separate. If you think they should be merged (or one of them removed), do tell. Isabelle ^🔔 19:47, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
• Points 6 and 7 (receptions and Bulletin):
  • I've now clarified that and linked to the DOI (I will probably rewrite a portion of the reception section, still, and will rename during that time).
• Points 8, 9 and 10 (SLJ review and sequel):
  • I usually get my reviews from ProQuest, and then a quick search on google for other newspapers that I might've missed. Recently, while editing Flamer (novel), I've noticed that some keywords I previously didn't use on Google returns a good amount of reviews that don't show up on ProQuest, so I intend on doing a new search for more reviews. With regards to the sequel, I believe I found maybe a couple of reviews already, so it's likely it will get its own article, but I can begin expanding it here already, so I agree that adding a few blurbs might be useful for now. And thanks for the redirect! I usually forget to do these kinds of things.
    • ProQuest is nice. I slightly prefer Lit Resource Center available through Gale (and the wiki library) but also have I shared the google custom search engine I've made of the major review journals websites? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
      • That seems like a really useful link, thanks! With regards to Gale, I do use it sometimes, though I've noticed most of the times it and ProQuest show mostly the same results. Isabelle ^🔔 19:47, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
• Point 11 (more interviews):
  • Thanks for the extra links! They will be very useful for expanding the Background and Themes sections.

As a note to myself, I will also probably need to expand the lede after all these changes as well as do a decent amount of copy-editing. This should take some time to finish, but feel free to leave here any more comments if you remember of anything else that you believe can be improved. Isabelle ^🔔 02:03, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

@Barkeep49: I've now made all the suggested changes. While I managed to find a few more reviews to add to the article (which I don't know how I missed), I did not find a review published by SLJ. All I found was one published in the Fuse8 blog, which I wasn't sure should be added, so I left it out for now. I tried to add some information on the illustrations, but all I found were comments by reviewers, one saying they looked like they were made in charcoal, another with graphite. I also attempted a "Major themes" section, but couldn't find much info to add there, as you can see.

Anyways, feel free to go over the changes and point if there is anything I missed or that could be improved. Thanks as always. Isabelle ^🔔 21:10, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

See my comments above Isabelle. I haven't given the LEAD a re-read yet so I might have comments on that but it sounds like that might still be a work in progress? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

@Barkeep49: I've left a comment on the topics above, but to sum it up, I've greatly reduced the plot section, added a new paragraph for the "Major themes" section and created the "Style" section. Do take a look and tell me what you think. Thanks. Isabelle ^🔔 19:47, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

@Isabelle Belato I have gone ahead and passed it. Congrats! Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:23, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 21:04, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that while writing Scary Stories for Young Foxes, Christian McKay Heidicker, under his agent's advise, "added a snuggle for every snarl"? Source: Christian McKay Heidicker's Newbery Honor Acceptance Speech. Event occurs at 2:46.
  • ALT1:... that Scary Stories for Young Foxes was initially planned to be a retelling of the old Berenstain Bears scary stories? Source: "Utah author wins Newbery Honor for 'Scary Stories for Young Foxes'". The Salt Lake Tribune.
  • ALT2:... that the tales told in Scary Stories for Young Foxes are all retellings of classic horror stories from the point of view of foxes? Source: "Interview with Christian McKay Heidicker, Author of Scary Story for Young Foxes" (Interview).

• Reviewed: TBD Template:Did you know nominations/Naoki Saito

Improved to Good Article status by Isabelle Belato (talk). Self-nominated at 03:02, 21 August 2021 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is a recent GA, long enough and sourced. No copyvio on Earwig. Hooks are cited and interesting. The only problem with ALT2 is that the source (and others I found online) seems to indicate that the book was intended as a homage, rather than a retelling of the Berenstain Bears, so the hook should be tweaked. Other than that it looks great! Once qpq has been provided this nom should be good to go. BuySomeApples (talk) 05:17, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

• Hi and thanks for the review, BuySomeApples! I'd like to add Template:Did you know nominations/Naoki Saito as a QPQ, although I'm awaiting for the nominator's answer about their hook. Concerning the advice, I believe you meant Alt1, since that's the on which mention the Berenstain Bears? I've tweaked it (source should be the same). Isabelle ^🔔 15:11, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

• Alt1b: that Scary Stories for Young Foxes was initially planned to be an homage to the old Berenstain Bears scary stories?

@Isabelle Belato: Thank you for adding the qpq and tweaking the alt hook! You're right I meant ALT1 (sorry about that hehe). This nom looks all ready now. BuySomeApples (talk) 01:47, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

To T:DYK/P4