Talk:Tolkien: A Look Behind The Lord of the Rings/GA1
GA Review
[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.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs) 02:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Dibsing. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks. Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:08, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
- Suggest links to realistic fiction, epic poetry, fairy tales, ghost stories, and gothic literature since all are relevant to the topic
- Linked.
- It's odd to have the 2003 updated version mentioned before the publication history even tells us it exists. Possibly it might be better to move publication history up before the synopsis? Or maybe amend to "An updated 2003 edition", if you don't want to shuffle things around
- Done.
- Otherwise the synopsis is well-written, I can't find anything in the prose to complain about
- Thank you.
- The reception section could use some revising; currently it is comprised almost entirely of large quotes, to the point of overquoting. We should be summarizing and reflecting what sources say, not simply repeating it. I recently QF'd an article for having a body 40% comprised of large quotes, so it would be hypocritical of me not to point it out here.
- Paragraph 1 is entirely a large quote, which I think is the most unreasonable and will be a sticking point.
- Rewritten.
- Paragraph 1 is entirely a large quote, which I think is the most unreasonable and will be a sticking point.
- Paragraph 2 is not much better. The entire thing is 142 words; when quotes are removed, it is 33 words.
- Rewritten.
- Paragraph 2 is not much better. The entire thing is 142 words; when quotes are removed, it is 33 words.
- Paragraph 3 is closer to what I would expect - much less quoting, much more summarizing
- Noted.
- Paragraph 3 is closer to what I would expect - much less quoting, much more summarizing
- One way this could be avoided might be to create paragraphs per theme rather than one paragraph for each review
- Done.
- Were there no reviews of the updated edition?
- Added one.
- I noticed in the navbox that Carter has another "Behind the X" book, for Lovecraft - could be worth mentioning here somewhere, even if in a "See also"
- Or perhaps the navbox's "followed by" link is exactly the link we require...
- Oop! Completely didn't see that. That works :)
- Or perhaps the navbox's "followed by" link is exactly the link we require...
- Images suitable - NFCC for the cover and Odin image old & therefore free.
- Noted.
- No copyvio/close para concerns. (Earwig shits a brick about Tolkien Gateway, but revision dates make it clear that our synopsis predates theirs).
- Noted. A large part of TG is copied directly from the WikiProject.
- I figured theirs was taken from ours, although the edit summary where they introduce the synopsis leaves something to be desired. Either way, the dates make it clear that we were here first, so it's all good.
- Noted. A large part of TG is copied directly from the WikiProject.
That's all I got. No rush on responding, cheers. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks! Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:09, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- Hey Chiswick Chap, all looks good to me, so we're a pass here. Cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 09:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks! Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:09, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
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.