Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Peer review/Master and Commander

Master and Commander

This is an article I wrote early on in my life here on Wikipedia and is a fairly full as novel articles go here so I thought I would put it forward as the first "Novels WikiProject" Peer review. Have a look at it guys and see what you think. Also you can start to enter your favourite articles for further peer reviews. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 12:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yllosubmarine

I'm not sure if I'm doing this correctly, but seeing as how this is a new project, and I'm quite giddy with the idea of it, I thought I'd have a go. Aside from the stub sections, which definitely need more meat on them, I'm confused by the "Film, TV or theatrical adaptations" section. It's rather ambiguous, and it would be nice to have something along the lines of what Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World has; a slightly indepth explanation of the differences between Master and Far Side, and how both fit into the other books. Also, this may seem slightly picky, but I've noticed that Lord Keith is a character in the book, but I don't see a note as to the fact that the guy actually existed. I like little tidbits like that in articles, and as I haven't read the books, I'm wondering if there are other characters based off of fact? Perhaps that can fit into "Allusions/references to actual history, geography and current science." I'm also curious about the red-linked HMS Sophie and the significance between that. Hope this helps! María: (habla ~ cosas) 18:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My 2 cents

First of all, for a novel article this is quite good, certainly considering it was one of your first attempts. It could use some work though. Here are my thoughts:

Fair use images should have a rationale why fair use is allowed on the pages they are used. I have added a rationale, take a look at it. (Unfortunately, it seems that fair use pictures will not be allowed anymore).
The plot summary is fine as it is, unless this is not the end of the novel. Larger plot summaries tend to discourage reading the article. I recommend removing the stub notice.
The characters section should be reworked as prose; it should not be a list. See WP:EMBED for more details on this MoS guideline. It should state what role the character plays, what development he goes through, etc.
Same goes for ships. Their role and fate should be explained.
The list of reviews should go. Every respectable newspaper has a book review section; this book is probably reviewed thousands of times all over the world. And just a quote for literary significance is not enough. This should also be rewritten as prose, possibly incorporating the quote into the text.
I think release details should be an article itself; this section can then be transformed into a (short) paragraph about the number of releases, the number of languages it is translated into and so on.
The references could be used for adding in-line references.

Just my 2 cents. As I haven't read the novel nor seen the film, I cannot help more than this. Er rab ee 11:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article lead

At first glance, the lead needs expansion per WP:LEAD. CloudNine 18:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Er.

Hello, people. I too am relatively new to Wikipedia. However, I have read Master and Commander.

For one, the plot summary is incomplete. No offense, but you've left out more than half the novel. Even a basic mini-synopsis is better than something that implies that the book simply ends with Aubrey's visit with Lord Keith. Dread Pirate Felix 23:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]