Wikipedia:Peer review/Enid Blyton/archive1

Enid Blyton

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Enid Blyton has become rather controversial over the last fifty years or so, banned from the BBC, accused of sexism, racism and goodness knows what else. Yet as a kid I loved reading her books, and Dr Blofeld and I felt she deserved a better article than the one she had. We want to make the article the best it can be, hence this request for a peer review. Eric Corbett 21:15, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Some general comments

At the moment, I think the article needs an overall copyedit to tighten it up, get it more organized, and make the prose overall read in a more active fashion. Much of it reads like a Garrison Keillor monologue about Lake Wobegon, with a lyrical flow that circles around like eddies in a stream, meandering here and there, but ultimately a bit soporific in effect. It's an interesting article, but there were parts where I had trouble focusing. Then, once in a while, out pops some random sentence or concept that seems out of context, like a boat on that lazy stream hitting a sandbar! She's certainly a fascinating individual. I can tell a bit too easily that this article has two lead editors, and I suggest that each of you do a copyedit run over the work that was primarily done by the other (if you haven't already) to smooth out the style. Montanabw^(talk) 04:45, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

1) Lede: Lede is meandering, yet simultaneously a bit incomplete; I'd suggest a copyedit to tighten the prose of what's there, and pace it closer to the order of the material in the article. it's a bit heavy on listing her works, perhaps chop some of that detail and then add in a bit more biographical material from the article body, such as her rather complex personal life and struggle with Alzheimer's, early years, charitable pursuits, etc... more of a summary of actual content. But maybe wait to edit it until you shore up the other sections.

I think the lead will have to be rewritten somewhat as the form of the article stabilises. Eric Corbett 16:21, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

2) Early life and education: I would definitely make this section have a bit more active voice. I'm a fan of a few more commas and breaking up some run-on sentences (yes, I'm a Yank, but...) I sort of feel this section sort of wanders around too much. I would note that the line beginning the last paragraph, "By late 1916 Blyton had virtually ceased contact with her family." would actually fit better up in the first paragraph, it's abrupt and jarring where it is at; I realize you have a more or less chronological flow to that section, but not 100% and her difficult relationship with her family is best consolidated together. Overall content itself is solid, but I'd work on the prose.

3) Writing career sections: The bit about her educational texts possibly needs to be its own paragraph with a bit of an introduction, it is an abrupt transition and doesn't have a lot of context. As you move into the commercial success section, it starts to become a bit of a wall of text that begins to be a bit of a challenge to get through. You might want to consider (just an idea) blending the selected works section into this section of the article, thus putting the link to the bibliography earlier in the article and making the film and TV adaptations section stand alone.

4) The writing technique section is fascinating, by the way. Also a bit more tightly written, flows better than the sections before it. Maybe here expand a little on her characters,

There might be more to say about the autobiographical nature of George, and maybe what's already in the article about her could be incorporated in the Writing technique section. I'll ponder on that. Eric Corbett 16:24, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

5) Personal life: I'm often in a quandary about these sections, I tend to favor a more chronological organization that works in the personal with the professional, or putting the material early on (though I have articles myself that are organized just as yours is here) In this article, you may need to show the interplay between the two, at least as far as her first marriage goes. Not a moral issue, but I was reading the writing career section and thinking something was missing here and there.

6) Charitable works: Maria Dicken is the person the Dicken medal is named after - anything in that to expand here? I'd like a little more info on the clubs and such, this section reads a bit as if it is something everyone already knows about, which may be true in the UK, but not the US. Also may want to wikilink "Paddling pool" - that's a UK-ism, I presume the same as a US wading pool?

7) Critical backlash - did ANYONE like her books? I'd suggest renaming this to "Critical reception" or something similar and maybe move some of the material about her popularity from the legacy section into this one. Also might want to kill the subheadings and make this section have more of a chronological flow. Just a thought. I would split the modern revisions section into its own level two header; it's somewhat distinguishable from the reviews section - just me, but I find it kind of appalling that her books are being rewritten beyond recognition for modern readers, I wonder how Lemony Snicket sells in the UK ... toning down the worst excesses is one thing, but the name-changing and such seems over the top - that article linked at your talk discusses some of the criticism and backlash against the rewrites, may be worth adding.

Maybe the rewrites, the film and television material could be worked into a new section on the posthumous development of her work and life story, just an organizational idea.

Overall, I'm intrigued by this writer (I am put in mind of The Happy Hollisters book series here in the US), It's a worthy FAC once it gets a new coat of paint and you go through the attic to clean out the cobwebs and consolidate all the boxes into better organized ones.

More later. I've kind of thrown you a lot of food for thought here; but I think if you can give it a look with fresh eyes, what I'm saying might make sense. Hope this has been helpful Montanabw^(talk) 04:45, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Much food for thought there indeed, thanks very much. Eric Corbett 06:29, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Comments I enjoyed reading the article this morning. I never knew there was so much to say about the woman. I read a lot of Blyton's books in the late 1950s, but by the early 1960s I preferred Batman and Superman. My first impression is that the flow of the article would benefit from a little rearranging. We first encounter her daughter, Gillian, before reading about her marriage - and she is linked on her second occurrence. Would the "Personal life" section not be better placed under "Biography"? Questions arose in my mind that were not answered until much later in the article, which I found a little frustrating. Some specific points:

• "...and the themes of her books, particularly Noddy." This sounds odd, Noddy is a character not a book or a theme.
• "...which had already been banned by the BBC since the 1930s" needs expanding a little, because the BBC is not a library or a publisher as such. Should it say banned from being broadcasted on the radio or such like?
• I think this needs to be in another sentence "... her father, whom she adored." Perhaps in this sentence "She was devastated when her father left the family to live with another woman."
• This sounds odd "She was not so keen on all the academic work" does it mean "academic subjects"?
• Here "but decided that she was best suited to being a writer", I'm not sure whether it should be "becoming" not "being".
• "Blyton was baptised at Elm Road Baptist Church" but "at Woodbridge Congregational Church Blyton met teacher Ida Hunt" - did she change her religious denomination? (V. minor point)
• What are "useful articles for children"?
• Here "Blyton made her first contribution to The Morning Post and earned £1095.10s.2d for her work in that year." Did all this money come from The Morning Post?
• "In 1927 Blyton bought a typewriter.." seems an odd fact to add unless some mention of handwritten manuscripts goes before it.
• Here "Matthew Grenby, author of Children's Literature, states that..." states, stated always sound pompous and the usage is a particular problem on Wikipedia.
• No mention of the war.

  I'm not sure what Blyton was doing during the war other than continuing to write as usual. I'll have a look around. Eric Corbett 16:20, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

• I'm not sure what "easy reading" is.

  Something that can be easily read, no big words or long sentences and such like. I thought it was a fairly common term? Eric Corbett 16:20, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

• "Blyton published her last book in the Noddy Library series" - Noddy Library?
• This is a the end of the article "Helena Bonham Carter played the title role", but there is a long quote from her further up. The duplication of information is probably necessary but made my think, you have already told me this.

More generally, I can hear at least two voices on reading this, some homogenization of style might be needed. Thanks for a engaging read and a solidly researched contribution. Graham Colm (talk) 09:48, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Graham, and you're right about the need to homogenize the voices. Eric Corbett 13:11, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks Montana and Graham for your input here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:04, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Crisco 1492

• Owing to RL obligations I may take a few days to go through this article. Perhaps surprisingly, I don't think I've read any of her work. Perhaps this can be blamed on me being a Canadian born twenty years after her death, but then I read the works of Dahl regularly...

• Very general issue: watch for Proseline. There are many, many paragraphs which begin "in (year)", which makes for very repetitive reading.
• Enid Mary Blyton (11 August 1897 – 28 November 1968) was an English children's writer whose books have been among the world's bestsellers for children since the 1930s, selling more than 600 million copies. - watch for repetition (children, sell in this instance)
• Noddy character, The Famous Five, and The Secret Seven series. - is "Noddy character" more correct than "character, Noddy" in BrE? Also, perhaps find a way to make it clearer that The Famous Five and The Secret Seven are both series. For instance, "her character Noddy and her series The Famous Five and The Secret Seven."
• Blyton's first book, Child Whispers, a 24-page collection of poems, was published in 1922, and she occasionally used the pseudonym Mary Pollock after marrying Major Hugh Alexander Pollock in 1924. - this doesn't really go well with the first paragraph. I'd move it south a bit.
• which the BBC had refused to broadcast since the 1930s because of their perceived lack of literary merit. - double check: 1930s is correct?

  It is indeed. Blyton first submitted her work to the BBC in 1936. Eric Corbett 15:26, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

• but they have nevertheless continued to be bestsellers since her death in 1968. - somewhat repeats information from the first paragraph
• The section #Early life and education does not show up in the lede.
• Are the addresses necessary?

  I don't think they are, no. Eric Corbett 04:49, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

• In November 1897 Blyton almost died from whooping cough, but was nursed back to health by her father, whom she adored. - collocating the two feels as if you are implying a cause and effect relationship. I'd move "whom she adored" to the next sentence
• He also passed on his interest in gardening, art, music, literature and the theatre to his daughter, - is "to his daughter" necessary? I mean, the article is about her, and if one "passes s.t. on" in this context, it definitely goes to the child from the parent
• She was devastated when her father left the family to live with another woman. - may be read as the mother being devastated; consider rephrasing
• In 1912 the family moved to 14 Elm Road in Beckenham. - I've added a CN tag, but to be honest I don't think this is really needed. I mean, it's in the same town and everything

  I agree, so I've deleted it. Eric Corbett 16:16, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

• with its haunted room, - worth including "reportedly"?
• Blyton's father taught her to play the piano, which she mastered well enough for him to believe that she might follow in his sister's footsteps and become a professional musician. - not sure the chronology works well here; last we heard of the father, he had left for another woman. This may be misunderstood as meaning that he had returned.
• On the Popular Fallacy that to the Pure All Things are Pure - short story/poem? If so, shouldn't this be in quotes? See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Text_formatting#When_not_to_use_italics
• ancient Greece, ancient Rome and other myths. - text appears to be saying that ancient Greece and Rome are both myths

  Hopefully fixed now. Eric Corbett 04:49, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

• Blyton's magazine was renamed Enid Blyton's Sunny Stories - don't think you've said that the magazine was owned by Blyton
• The Secret Island (five books) and The Circus Series - Is no italics correct?

  I think so. My understanding is that the names of series aren't italicised. Eric Corbett 16:14, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

• Blyton broke one of her strict rules by accepting a publisher's advance - what rules? Not mentioned anywhere
• I've read the #Biography section, and to be honest it feels quite naked without the #Personal life and #Charitable work to flesh it out. A biography is, in my opinion, the sum of all of these parts, rather than just various repetitions of "She published this in year". I mean, you mention she used her married name Pollock, but don't mention who she married or when she married until several sections later. #Death and legacy could simply be #Legacy, with the #Death worked into the biography section. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:47, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

  Thanks Crisco, yet more food for thought. Eric Corbett 15:26, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

• "Old Thatch" - with or without quotes for house names?
• Peterswood - why the italics?
• In 1934 Blyton and Pollock took a holiday at Seaview House on the Isle of Wight but she suffered a miscarriage before becoming pregnant with Imogen and giving birth in October the following year. - second half of this sentence is redundant to the preceding sentence
• Trocadero plc - is plc necessary here? I mean, it's like Inc., being part of a company name, right? Ltd. is also rarely used in running prose on Wikipedia, last I checked
• In 2012 The Famous Five was adapted for the German film Fünf Freunde, directed by Mike Marzuk. - would work best merged with another paragraph

  Agreed and done. Eric Corbett 01:13, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

• Similar gender issues surface in Five Have a Wonderful Time, in which Anne says "I don't expect boys to tidy up and cook and do things like that but George ought to because she's a girl". - needs a cite, as this is going into interpretation — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:58, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

  The edition I've just read has Anne saying something rather different, but that may be another one of the revisionist editions. I've removed that quote for now pending access to an earlier edition, but it's not really necessary to make the point anyway. Eric Corbett 04:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

  Thanks for that. Eric Corbett 01:21, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Gerda

• My attention went first to the attractive infobox. The award seems not mentioned in the body.
• "bestsellers for children since the 1930s, selling" - can the repetition be avoided? Sales first, content later?
• "enormously popular" sounds like an enormously popular phrase.
• "her Noddy character, The Famous Five, and The Secret Seven series" - for people who don't know that Famous Five is a series, that information comes late (but perhaps the people don't exist).
• "Blyton's work became increasingly controversial among literary critics, teachers and parents from the 1950s onwards" - can we have the time sooner?
• "but they have nevertheless continued to be bestsellers since her death in 1968" - not before? Perhaps "even after her death"?

"Continued to be bestsellers" I think clearly asserts that they were already bestsellers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:55, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

• "several adaptations of her books for stage, screen and television have been made" - seems to belong earlier in chronology.

Early life

• I removed one "born" and confess that I would like to meet her parents first, then siblings, then street address.
• "In November 1897 Blyton almost died" - she is a baby, and there are several Blytons, - could we say Enid, until she grows up a bit?
• "Enid's mother, who showed little interest in her pursuits. She was devastated when her father left the family to live with another woman." - only on second reading I knew who "her" and "she" was.
• I would place the baptism right after birth, - not after her parents' funerals.

She was 13 when she was baptized, doesn't make much sense from a chronological point of view. I'm not sure it's even relevant information to the article.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:57, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

I got to the heading Later works and wonder if I should continue to render titles italic? - later, anyway, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:41, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

• Comment: If it's helpful, the first edition of Child Whispers (including its cover) will be PD for Wikipedia purposes (though not for Commons) using {{PD-US-1923-abroad}} and {{Do not move to Commons}}. It may make for a nice illustration for the article. J Milburn (talk) 20:42, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Comment from SchroCat

Just one question for now, but I hope to review more completely soon.

• Is enidblytonsociety.co.uk a reliable source? Is this an official organisation supported by the Blyton estate, or just a fan site?

- SchroCat (talk) 23:13, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't know. Eric Corbett 23:17, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

"The Society Organiser and researcher for the website is Tony Summerfield. Tony is probably the world's greatest expert on the author. " says the article on it..♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:12, 13 March 2014 (UTC)