Template:Did you know nominations/The Little Red Chairs
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:24, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
The Little Red Chairs
[edit]- ... that the title of Edna O'Brien's 23rd book, The Little Red Chairs, refers to performance art commemorating the 11,541 victims of Radovan Karadžić? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
Created/expanded by Sadads (talk). Self-nominated at 03:54, 4 March 2017 (UTC).
- Not a full review - Upon starting to review the article I immediately noticed that the article has a very large number of quotes within it (Earwigs also flags them) totaling over 25 at a quick count. I am concerned that that number is too high and that we are overusing non-free content. Mifter (talk) 05:12, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Mifter: I don't see how it could be less quoty: I have never read the book, and most of the focus of the articles is on critical opinions (which necessarily requires quoting-- they are opinions after all). If you wanted to trim any of the quotes: I welcome that. But start articles for novels frequently start like this, and even Featured Articles on novels, have quote heavy opinion sections (see Moonraker_(novel)#Reception, The_Good_Terrorist#Reception and Tintin_in_Tibet#Reception). Sadads (talk) 23:07, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
- thanks for the response. I understand where you are coming from but am still not sure. In the interests of preventing this from sitting for a long period I'm asking for a second reviewer/opinion. Mifter (talk) 01:46, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm inclined to pass it myself. It's difficult to avoid quotation when discussing a work's reception. You could paraphrase instead, but I find it's better in that case to quote directly and attribute the speaker. WP:QUOTEFARM is an essay in any case. The article was new enough at the time of the nomination and more than long enough. It cites its sources an as discussed avoids close paraphrasing. The hook is interesting and supported by the cited source. It's negative toward Radovan Karadžić but he's a convicted war criminal so that's somewhat unavoidable. QPQ is done. Mackensen (talk) 21:39, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
