Talk:The Scorpion and the Frog/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 15:04, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Lead is too short. Two sentences doesn't cut it at all, it needs to summarise the main points of the whole article.
"This fable seems to have emerged in Russia in the early 20th century, although it was likely inspired by more ancient fables.
I dislike captionless images, a brief description of the characters and their interaction might be useful here.
I can't help but think that "vicious" isn't quite the word we need in this encyclopedic account.

I agree that vicious is probably not the right word. "Malevolent" seems a better fit. There is some rcent research would support that. They call it the "Malevolent Dark Core of Personality". https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/09/180926110841.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.233.85.43 (talk) 20:00, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The representation of the moral of the story is too shallow.

From the Swedish article: "The moral is that there are parts of one's nature that one cannot suppress, and that others cannot expect one to suppress."

It does not have to be a vicious intent. 195.112.86.84 (talk) 11:38, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see this article is included as a "see also" in Mr. Arkadin but there's nothing explaining why. Not a major issue for this GAN but something ought to go into that article in the prose rather than just a context-less see also.
And actually, it links to a subsection of The Frog and the Mouse which contains information about this story and its origins etc, which don't appear to be covered in this article.
"The fable also appears..." this and following two sentences are unreferenced.
"of The Scorpion and the Turtle. The Scorpion and the Turtle appears" repetitive.
"c. 1500" non-breaking space.
Consistency in italics and non-italics for the title of this. Interestingly I see that The Frog and the Mouse is not italicised...
The Farmer and the Viper is also not italicised in our article.
" interpretation. A common interpretation " repetitive.
"vicious personalities" I'm not sure about this again.
"Giancarlo Livraghi has" who he? Contextualise.
" Freudian psychoanalysis" sea of blue.
How does ref 21 source the claim? And in any case, is discogs reliable?
"pp. 133-134" etc should be an en-dash for page ranges.
" "Fable 21 - The Mouse and the Frog (" should be an en-dash.

That's it for me. Primarily issues with "vicious" and the material in other related articles. On hold. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 14:27, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An amazing coincidence, but I'm watching the second episode of the second season of After Life and the tale is retold there to Ricky Gervais in the graveyard. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 18:57, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kurzon I'll close this review on 1 May if no progress is made. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:40, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: I fixed some flaws, didn't fix others for these reasons:

The lede summarizes all the most pertinent points of the article. There really isn't much else to say on this topic. It's not exactly a biography of Charlemagne. I am not going to inflate the lede with filler.
It's inadequate, it doesn't cover the major sections of the article. I'm not asking you for filler, nor am I suggesting it's a biography of Charlemagne, just that it's currently an insufficient summary of all the main points of the article. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:34, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am uncomfortable with captionless images, but what should I put there? This is an illustration I made so I did not mention the source, as I would have done had I taken it off someone else's book.
An image caption like "In the fable, the scorpion convinces a frog to carry him across a river on his back." or something would be far superior to blank. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:34, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Vicious" is appropriate because this is about a work of fiction, not a description of real people.
None of the sources I have access to describe this trait as "vicious". The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:34, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why am I being blamed for problems in other articles, which I didn't even write?
I'm not blaming you for anything. I'm pointing out inconsistencies in formatting across similar articles, I'm pointing out that other articles contain material which is absent from but directly related to this one. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:34, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kurzon (talk) 10:26, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:34, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And I note you haven't fixed some of the other issues but haven't noted why. I won't be able to continue this review if we can't track the modifications and the resolution of this first set of queries. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:36, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unless we get some resolution on the above matters, I'll be failing this nomination on 1 May. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:27, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]