Wikipedia:Peer review/Turkish literature/archive1
I've been working on this article for about a month with a view to getting it up to Featured Article status. I realize that the article is long (47KB or so), but: (a) this is an article about the entire history of a literature, and requires space to even approach adequacy to the topic; (b) the associated articles are still in a rather sorry state, and until they are worked on (which I plan to do at some point in the future), this is about the only informative article on Turkish literature going at Wikipedia at the moment.
With those caveats in mind, any and all advice about what to do with this article will be both considered and appreciated. Saposcat 10:42, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
- heading sections capitalization needs to be fixed (only cap first letter of heading)
- "One significant preliminary point to be made about Turkish literature is that" - unecessary words, get rid of them
- koroglu redlink - make it blue
- should this poem line really be in bold? : Bir gül mü var bu gülşen-i âlemde hârsız
- the heading "Early Modern..." sounds confusing, can it be renamed?
- the book cover "memed my hawk" might not be fair use - i dont see it or the author mentioned in the adjacent text?
- garip pic needs caption
- category:articles lacking sources ???
Zzzzz 11:17, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
- All changes suggested by Zzzzz made. "Köroğlu" link has been taken care of (in an admittedly rudimentary fashion, pending sufficient research). "Early modern Turkish literature" may be "confusing", but I believe it is highly appropriate insofar as it is from this literature (i.e., the New Literature, Dawn of the Future, and National Literature movements) that modern (i.e., post-independence) Turkish literature directly arose. As for "Memed, My Hawk", the author (Yaşar Kemal) was already mentioned in adjacent text, but I have now added a direct reference to the book as well. Thanks for reading and suggesting, Zzzzz. Saposcat 19:54, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know much about Turkish literature, but it looks like it has written with great care, the bibliography and notes are long, it is indeed a small essay. --Wikipedius 16:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC)