Jump to content

Talk:The Tale of Jemima Puddle-Duck

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleThe Tale of Jemima Puddle-Duck was one of the Language and literature good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 23, 2010Good article nomineeListed
August 31, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
March 16, 2023Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Adaptation

[edit]

The U.S. LC Catalogue includes record of a 2002 copyright musical stage adaptation

  • LCCN 2007-390920, c2002, The Tale of Jemima Puddle-Duck: a musical play based on the story by Beatrix Potter

which is credited primarily to musician Steve Liebman, also to children's writers Katherine Paterson and Stephanie S. Tolan.

This one --unlike two adaptations of Paterson novels by the same team, see Talk:Bridge to Terabithia#Musical stage adaptation-- is assigned subject heading LCSH "Children's plays". No sound track is mentioned. --P64 (talk) 16:13, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Which breed?

[edit]

Bibliographic information of footnote is not found

[edit]

Bibliographic information of footnote No.2, 26 (Lane 2001), No.17 (Hobbs 1989), and No.19 (Lane 1978) is not found in Section Works Cited. Is it (Lane, Margaret (1985) [1946]. The Tale of Beatrix Potter. London: Frederick Warne. ISBN 978-0-7232-4676-3.) ? Please corect. Loasa (talk) 13:47, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · WatchWatch article reassessment pageMost recent review
Result: Speedily delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:15, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

80% of authorship was by serial book copyright violator ItsLassieTime (under their sock Susanne2009NYC). I have presumptively reverted to the latest pre-ILT revision, which obviously wipes the majority of the content and puts it well beneath the standards expected at GA. Anyone seeking to rescue it would have to rewrite entirely from scratch, as nothing ILT inserted can be trusted. ♠PMC(talk) 00:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.