Talk:See You in the Cosmos/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Kingsif (talk · contribs) 17:56, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Kingsif, and I'll be doing this review. This is an automated message that helps keep the bot updating the nominated article's talkpage working and allows me to say hi. Feel free to reach out and, if you think the review has gone well, I have some open GA nominations that you could (but are under no obligation to) look at. Kingsif (talk) 17:56, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kingsif, thanks for checking out this nomination! I'll sure try looking at other nominations after this one— haven't done it since ages! Gerald WL 04:38, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Lead

I've copyedited the lead, which was too long, some parts just didn't make sense, and in parts it didn't seem to accurately reflect the article content. It should be an appropriate summary now.

Background

I feel like some of this would benefit from a split to create a Jack Cheng bio article.
Hmm, but as I've searched, all RSes covering Cheng is mostly talking about Cosmos, so it's not him that's necessarily notable. Gerald WL 03:15, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's enough information already in this article to warrant a separate bio, while he may be most notable for this book the coverage goes beyond that. Kingsif (talk) 09:53, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This section could more or less start from the Kickstarter part, but I feel like his inspiration for it should be mentioned before how he got funds.

I removed that bit. Perhaps it's a bit confusing: he got Kickstarter for These Days, not Cosmos. But yeah, felt a little trvial.
His brother's room had Pale Blue Dot, a 1990 photograph of Earth from 6 billion kilometers away taken by Voyager 1, on his shelf. Seeing the photograph reminded him of an episode of Radiolab about the photograph. The next day, he instantly had the idea of the novel in his head and worked on it immediately. - Is it necessary to mention that the photograph reminded him of Radiolab? Or explain what Pale Blue Dot is? I feel like it could just say he saw the image and was inspired by it. This goes for the last sentence, too; it's interesting to say he started work on the book the next day, but that could be simply stated, and at the very least using both "instantly" and "immediately" so close is poor style and a little hyperbolic.
I've condensed it slightly-- is it all good?
Cheng recalled via WUOM - this sounds like WUOM is some hypnotherapy technique to make him able to recall things, rather than a radio station he gave an interview to. The station doesn't need to be mentioned, but if it is, can the language be indicative (rather than trying for a heightened style and floundering)?
Removed WUOM.
The mention of the road trip inspiration seems to be presented a little backward; could Cheng following in his father's footsteps (not "mimicking"...) be mentioned first in this part?
I don't understand... can you alter the sentence as you suggested? Cause I didn't find anything wrong with the sentence.

It isn't necessarily grammatically wrong, but the sentence structure is non-intuitive, it puts ideas kind of in a bad order for understanding. Kingsif (talk) 09:53, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As the novel included elements detailing social work and child protective services, Cheng stated in the novel's acknowledgment section that he researched the topic with the help of several friends. - again, this could be rearranged to be more standard English; just say that Cheng researched the topics. However, this would probably be more appropriate for a writing section than the background.
Done. Also, in novel articles, they have the whole writing process in a Background section.

Really? That seems... to not really comply with general MOS, but if it's the books project standard then it's fine. Kingsif (talk) 09:53, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph about Asian-American representation is almost entirely a direct quotation, either introduce this and use it as a blockquote, or summarize Cheng's statement. I also note that in the source, this quotation is contextualized by Cheng feeling pressure to write for a minority audience. Why is this not mentioned?
I'll look into this soon.
He hoped that minority writers dilute their idea scope to a wider range than just their ethnicity - could this also be somewhat clarified and expanded on
This last paragraph is also about writing, not background.
See point 6.
Cheng did not have any insights on what the novel's target demographic would be - another odd phrasing. I assume this means that he wasn't thinking about targeting his writing for a certain demographic? Could that be simply put instead of making it seem like there were pollsters he didn't employ...

... but the rest of the sentence suggests that even thinking of his protagonist's age he was not specifically considering the book as a children's novel. Perhaps more source consultation needed to make this clear.

I think I've got it now; I think your word choice made it unclear. I could rephrase? Kingsif (talk) 09:53, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also will look into this soon.
Do we need to mention that his agent is based in Barcelona? Do we? Especially written as some epithet...
Removed.
told Cheng that this should be submitted - "it" instead of "this". But also, perhaps reorder this part, too, to say that his agent thought it would be a good YA novel, though Cheng had not been aiming his writing at any demographic in particular.
I think this has been said in the previous sentence.
"Quantitatively" - unnecessary! Why! (There is so much wrong with shoving this word here for no reason)

Just say that after Craig copyedited for the audience there were few other edits, though Cheng wrote the manuscript like a "lucid dream" that he could return to and improve upon.

I know, right! I'm pretty sure I was in the early months of editing when making this article.

It's very detailed for a "fresh" article! Kingsif (talk) 09:53, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

the novel, having been a... - tense should be "being". Presuming the book exists.
Done.
"juvenile book"? What's wrong with YA? You know, the actual term.
I think YA does not really reflect the style of the novel, as the novel is more aimed towards the lower part of YA and not the older YA. So like 9-13 years old.

Whatever you think, YA is an actual term, whereas "juvenile" is not (and, as a word, is most commonly associated with prison and diabetes). If your first language isn't English, you may be confusing "juvenile" with "youth" (often the same word in Latin languages), which still isn't a defined literary genre. Kingsif (talk) 09:53, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

compared the novel [...] with works like - in this forumlation, "compared to" or "compared against", not "with".
Done.

Plot

Not wise to start a sentence with a numeral, let alone a section.
Mind explaining, because I don't see how it's not wise.

It's poor style for written works and discouraged by most if not all style guides, from Wikipedia to academia. Kingsif (talk) 09:55, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alex has an iPod spray-painted in gold, on which he has been busy recording various audio to recreate the Voyager Golden Record, and launch his homemade rocket, Voyager 3 - so this is either saying that his iPod is launching a rocket, or that Alex has a "launch his homemade rocket". Is there something missing or did the sentence just lose its thread?
Copyedited.
Reading Befriended on the train, martial arts master Zed, who after taking a vow of silence only communicates with a chalkboard, brings him to SHARF, where his roommate friend Steve will be launching a rocket, which their roommate Nathan designed., I'm going to guess lost its thread... the run-on sentences are close to nonsensical. Please rewrite with more simple sentences.
Done.

Characters

Although he is considered immature in terms of age, he considers his mental age to be around 13, and has a pet peeve of others calling him a kid. - again, an attempt at heightened language that isn't working. Something more standard English, like "Despite being aged eleven, Alex considers his mental age to be around that of a thirteen-year-old; he is viewed as young and immature, which annoys him."
Alex insisted with his perseverance - redundant
Removed the latter half.
Alex very often however he still - should be "Alex very often, but still"
Done
Alex's mentally-disordered mother - just say schizophrenic
Done
a 19-year-old female - woman; ages above nine don't need to be written out, but within the section it should be consistent, so either all-numerals or all-words. (WP:NUMERAL)
Done

Styles and themes

Can you say that the book is an epistolary novel, instead of using this as a descriptor?
Clarified... I guess?
Is it an actual transcription, i.e. sounds/syllables written, or is it just words?
Yep, your typical closed caption. Gerald WL 16:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't clarify. Kingsif (talk) 19:49, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is like you stated, with written sounds, like "[ALEX GRUNTING]" and "ALEX: It's fine." Gerald WL 07:27, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note 3 ("New Recording 4" is "not available" as in the novel, Alex deleted the vague track.) should really just be prose. Also, it needs a comma after "as", and "novel" should be "story".
Done.
These recordings were described to be recorded along with the novel's plot. - what does this mean?
So basically as the storyline flows, Alex is recording it all. Kind of like if the Anne Frank diary becomes a movie and instead of a diary she uses an iPod.

That doesn't clarify. Kingsif (talk) 19:49, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Kingsif, Alex's iPod is recording the whole storyline, either he talks about it entirely or the iPod records the events. Here's for example, how one of the plot points kinda went:

<quote>

ALEX: What's your name?

SOCIAL WORKER: Juanita.

ALEX: Ok, Juanita. Is it okay if I talk to my iPod for a second?

JUANITA: Sure.

ALEX: Okay. Guys, I have important news! CivSpaceScott invited us to see the rocket...

<end of quote>

As you see, we have two points here. One, the social worker name's Juanita, and two, CivSpaceScott invited him to the rocket launch. But the first was through direct dialogue, and second is through a monologue. Gerald WL 07:36, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

no quotations in speeches - what does this mean?
Usually, novels have stuff like He replied, "No thank you." This does not have one, so like He replied, No thank you.

So it should be "no quotation marks are used to indicate speech". (Basically, you're using "quotations" and "speeches" very wrong and it's confusing - the current text means that characters gave public speeches and didn't quote other people's words in those speeches, which might make sense if talking about a graduation ceremony, but not in a kids' book) Kingsif (talk) 19:49, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Children's Literature Association Quarterly, an academic journal published by the Johns Hopkins University Press, - CLAQ is wikilinked, we don't need a clause defining it
Done.
Maybe explain that the "correspondence" theme isn't the typical meaning of correspondence. It's wikilinked, but since the usual meaning is so common, people will likely overlook this... However, if it's talking about correspondence as in the next quotation, it is referring to the usual meaning (the principal entry at Correspondence), and shouldn't be wikilinked, which is just creating confusion.
Done
After encapsulating the novel's narrative - you're saying a review encapsulates a narrative? Do you mean summarize?
Done

Some advice: big words aren't necessary for good articles, and can be a detriment if they are not common or easy to parse. They should particularly be avoided when you don't know their definitions/how to use them correctly.
This whole qualifying statement is also unnecessary: we don't need to know what other review text is near the conclusion that's being talked about.

I know. As I said, newbie thinks everything matters, so I just dumped everything. Obviously have improved a lot since.
I'm not sure why a large part of a review is being quoted here. While it mentions themes, it doesn't do so extensively: most of the quotation is reviewing the value of those themes. A lot of weight is being given to these views, with no other secondary sources about the themes to compare. And, of course, it is not necessary to quote it all - summarize in your own words (which also allays NPOV/WEIGHT concerns)
I find it very hard to paraphrase them unfortunately. Will try to look into this.

Publication history

Was the event launch before or at the same time as the start of the first run (i.e. was it a special pre-order event?) - it needs explaining either way for clarity, but if it was just a small signing event at launch, the launch date should probably be mentioned first.
At the same time; clarified
The Detroit Free Press observed that 40 guests came to the gathering - unusual phrasing but doesn't seem particularly notable anyway? 40 people in a bookshop is... less than I'd expect without a signing... also, it's in PRIMARY territory to be saying the DFP observed this, since the source is the report in the DFP: if you're keeping this, change "gathering" to "signing", and just say that there were 40 people there.
national release, it was shipped to every English-speaking nation according to Cheng - national but multiple nations is confusing. I'd put "According to Cheng" at the start of this claim.
Copyedited the whole paragraph
At the same time - as what? The last chronological thing referred to is the French and Spanish edition releases, is it the same time as those? If not, say when.
Specified "day"
Why are we waiting until the second paragraph to name the publishers? Is there any detail on why there are multiple publishers, or at least what their remits are?
Done
We don't need a long list of non-notable people. At the most, limit it to the main voice cast. Regarding Susan Bennett, a very notable voice actor, is there more information on why she was involved?
It's a relatively small cast, so I think complete information is suffice. Also, no further info regarding Susan.

If you want to keep it all, I would recommend list format; it's still too long for a list with no other detail in prose. Kingsif (talk) 19:50, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

Simply put, a NPOV nightmare. Just, rewrite it. Or maybe have someone who doesn't want to push the book rewrite it.

No, really, it's worse than a press release, I would be making comments for every phrase. TNT the section.

To help with this, please study other reception sections; there are ways to phrase how critics comment that help prevent the wikivoice sounding like it endorses the reviews.
Also, too much direct quoting here, too.
I'll look into this soon. Pretty sure I panicked as I nominated this for GAN, so I copyedited the section with my no-brainer knowledge of WP:RECEPTION.

Accolades

Should be a subsection of the above
Done

Future

Not necessary? Currently no plans for a future - doesn't need to be stated. Imagine if we made articles on everything that isn't planned to happen, but hasn't yet been confirmed not to.
I beg to differ, future sections are a thing, for example in Avengers: Endgame and stuff like that. It's noteworthy that Cheng has asked Hollywood if there could be an adaptation.

Disney having plans for a sequel to the highest-grossing movie ever is very different from an author, whom you don't think warrants his own article, talking to unnamed producers about adapting his book. Kingsif (talk) 19:53, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright

Earwig copyvio check - I am concerned at the length of direct quotations, and feel that both in terms of prose and to be on the safe side of text duplication, many quotations in the article should be shortened or summarized. No other copyvio nor any close paraphrasing detected.
Identifying image in infobox fine; author image and space paraphernalia images commons licensed
There are several book covers used together, but I do not think they meet fair use rationale. Three of the four are not meaningfully different from the original book cover in the infobox, and in my interpretation come under the same conditions as music album cover artwork (specifically, where the album is a 'child' of, e.g., a movie, and is not the article subject but a section of the e.g. movie article, the album may have an infobox but, if the album artwork is not meaningfully different from the e.g. movie poster - and sometimes when it is different but is not deemed necessary to identify the album, fair use does not apply). The German book cover is different enough, and since the title in German is also different probably comes under the need to identify. I am concerned about the sheer lack of prose discussion of any of the covers and would suggest that they are all unnecessary anyway.

Images

Not sure if the Cheng image is necessary, especially if you do split to an author article.
See the most above point
Golden Record and Voyager images seem suitable
There is no discussion of any of the book covers, which is also an excessive amount of NFCC claims (both for a relatively short article and compared against free images), so they seem unnecessary.
The World Without Us has one of them, though-- and it's an FA, so I guess it's suitable.

You see how all those covers are very different and that the FA has discussion of the book covers? You see how this article doesn't. Fair use needs a reason, that FA has two, you have none. Kingsif (talk) 19:54, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The awards table (illustration) needs to have separate columns for years.

Sources

Look generally solid, a variety of source types.
The Kristin Lenz source (currently [3]) says it is from the Society of Children's Book Writers and Illustrators, but that doesn't seem to be their website? Am I missing something?
It is a Blogspot page that is handled by the Society's Michigan division
You know you can use Cheng's podcast as a source for the making of to go in the article, right?
Currently trying to figure out how to put the information in here; without good care it might dismember the article.

Overall

@Gerald Waldo Luis: - I wrote out this review and then just forgot to actually put it here, so sorry! Prose is rather weak, NPOV concerns with reviews, and some image concerns: as a relatively short article some hard work could improve this in a suitable time frame, so on hold. Kingsif (talk) 16:05, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Waldo Luis & Kingsif, what's the status of this review? --Usernameunique (talk) 14:07, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Usernameunique, I'd suggest this GAN be closed as not listed for now. There's several major problems listed in this page about the article that I'd like to return to later. Currently I'm focusing on other articles. I'd be sure to renominate once it's all perfect. Gerald WL 14:16, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Usernameunique: I was waiting for a response to some points, and would have normally checked back after a week but it seems I had this review marked as "done" on my list. Gerald was working really collaboratively, so if he's not too busy with other things, I'd be happy to finish this up/keep it open. Kingsif (talk) 14:26, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kingsif, I'm hesitant to say this given you saying that I do well with this GAN (guy stuff), but I made a reply above suggesting that this GAN be closed for now as not listed. Amid this article being listed and still unreviewed, I am heavily working on stuff like Living in the Age of Airplanes (there's a current PR if you're interested) and other stuff, which would make it hard for me to navigate through this (reception section, stuff like that) for now. I'll be sure to notify you if I renominate this thing again. What do you think? Gerald WL 14:47, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Whatever works best for you is fine with me Kingsif (talk) 20:17, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kingsif, will you be closing this as not listed then? That is what Gerald Waldo Luis has requested. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:30, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]