Talk:The Most Famous Man in America

The Most Famous Man in America has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: August 8, 2013. (Reviewed version).

A fact from The Most Famous Man in America appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 June 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Debby Applegate studied pornographic writing techniques for her Pulitzer-winning The Most Famous Man in America?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Most Famous Man in America.

Wikipedia

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Reformed Christianity

	Reformed Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Reformed Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Reformed Christianity 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.Reformed ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject Reformed ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject Reformed ChristianityReformed Christianity articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Christianity: Reformed Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Reformed Christianity portal This article is supported by WikiProject Reformed Christianity (assessed as Mid-importance).

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Citation needed tags

I've removed some citation needed tags from the synopsis section, as I believe Wikipedia standard practice is to not cite the contents of a book or film--only direct quotations or opinions about the text. Examples of this can be see at the featured articles Uncle Tom's Cabin or Pilgrim at Tinker Creek. If I'm wrong about this, however, please correct me and let me know the relevant policy so I can avoid the mistake in the future! Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:41, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Most Famous Man in America/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Diannaa (talk · contribs) 15:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi K. I will be completing the review. The article is in pretty good shape, but there's work needed in a few areas:

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:
a contradiction of his father's stern Calvinism: Would this read better as "in contrast to"? Or does this change the meaning?

Done -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Contents section has four quotations from Applegate at the bottom of the section; I think at least two of these should be eliminated and incorporated into the prose.

Done -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

A. Provides references to all sources:
Sources are provided for all content; all are high quality periodicals. No copyright violations or too-close paraphrasing were found.

B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
Citation templates are effectively used and no technical errors were found in the formatting of the citations. Citation Bot, Reflinks, and Checklinks found no issues.

C. No original research:
* Opinions expressed are those of the quoted sources.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Main aspects are addressed:
We need some information on the publication history please. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Books for ideas on what material could be included here. At a minimum, list the initial publication and any other editions using info available at WorldCat.
Added that it came out in paperback, hardback, and ebook and that Three Leaves Press was also publishing it; I'm not sure if this is an imprint of Doubleday or what, so I've left it vague in the wording. Let me know if this works okay. I've left off the PawPrints edition, which seems to be just library binding of regular copies. -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:14, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

B. Remains focused:
Does it follow the neutral point of view policy?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Three images are provided, and they all check out okay from a licensing point of view.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

The article will be placed on hold for one week to address these items. Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 16:22, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review and suggestions. I'll work on addressing them now. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:50, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: I think I've addressed your concerns above, but just let me know if you feel further work is required. Thanks again for taking the time to review this one. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:44, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Sorry for the delay. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:52, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The book was generally well received by critics.

Ok, this sentence reads poorly. If it was generally well received by critics, then shouldn't it be cited? "Generally"? What does that mean? 73.6.249.87 (talk) 23:00, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]