Talk:Jane Austen/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Tim riley (talk · contribs) 19:52, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Starting first read-through. More soonest. Tim riley talk 19:52, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tim riley: With appreciation for someone taking on such a long article. The initial comments made are of a useful and thoughtful review. For practical reasons, your opening comments about the lede, which are on target, I plan to return to last in order of edits and possibly do a substantial rewrite after all the new edits are brought in. Otherwise, I have taken the last day or two to answer your preliminary inquiries below and bring most of them into the article. Looking forward to your "more soonest". Cheers. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 16:33, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

I have greatly enjoyed reading this article, and many parts of it are well up to GA standard. It consists chiefly of an excellent biography, with a shorter section on how Austen has been viewed during and after her lifetime, and details of a few adaptations. It has very little literary analysis of her works, but that is acceptable at GAN – the criteria do not require an article to be comprehensive. The main obstacle to promotion to GA is the lead section, which falls short of the required standard: see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section. A lead should summarise all the important material of the main text, which the present lead could, at a pinch, just about be said to do. But there is a second requirement for a lead – it must not contain material that isn't in the main text, and here is the problem: the lead is full of information and comment not substantiated in the body of the article. It is a pretty good rule of thumb that a lead should not need to contain citations, because all the statements in it are developed and cited in the main text. These points in the lead do not come up in the main text to any important degree:

Austen's literary realism
Her works contain biting irony and social commentary
Her plots are acclaimed
Austen is part of the transition to 19th-century literary realism
Her plots, are fundamentally comic
Her plots highlight the dependence of women on marriage

I don't quarrel with any of these points, but they cannot be mentioned in the lead unless they are developed in the main text.

Statements that need citations

Austen's writings were historically written during the period of high British Idealism and high British Romanticism.

Refined sentence and added links. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 21:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In 1788, her portrait may have been commissioned by her great uncle, Francis Austen. And in my view this statement, fairly pointless on its own, should either have its significance explained (the disputed authenticity of the portrait) or be dropped.

The most recent scholar in 2015, in the book titled Jane Austen's Kent, has endorsed it as authentic after the 2012 controversy. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 21:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The period since World War II has seen more scholarship on Austen using a diversity of critical approaches, including feminist theory, and perhaps most controversially, postcolonial theory. *However, the continuing disconnection between the popular appreciation of Austen, particularly by modern Janeites, and the academic appreciation of Austen has widened considerably.

Changing wording to identify three major scholarly anthologies about Austen and her work not around before WWII. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 21:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In January of 2016 a film version of Austen's early epistolary novel Lady Susan directed by Whit Stillman premiered at the Sundance Film Festival starring Kate Beckinsale and Chloe Sevigny under the borrowed title of another one of Austen's early novels Love & Friendship.

Have added one of the film reviews here from one of the premieres with link. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 21:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uncited statements that (IMO) should be removed

The sentimental relationship between Jane and Tom is at the centre of the 2007 biographical film Becoming Jane.
The three films were also produced and distributed on DVD for home video use.
The whole of the uncited “Popular culture” section.

Yes, all three of these items have been archived or elided. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 16:39, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate links, which should be removed

Francis William (Frank)
Cassandra Elizabeth
Steventon
[sic]
Bath
Southampton
Sense and Sensibility
Pride and Prejudice
typhus
Sanditon
Prince Regent
Henry Fielding
Samuel Richardson
Janeite
epistolary novel
Lady Susan

Removed all dup links per list, though I could not find the dup links for Francis William or for Richardson. The "sic" is retained next to "Love and Freindship" since this misspelling is well-known in Austen circles. If I missed any others then you may list them again or edit accordingly. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 21:04, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have some wholly optional tweaks that I may put forward for your consideration, but let us get the above points attended to first. I'll put the review on hold for a week to give you time to work on them. Tim riley talk 21:39, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looking in after a few days

The article is looking better, but the lead still discusses things not mentioned in the main text. "Literary realism" for instance, and "her plots are fundamentally comic" (there is nothing in the text about comedy or humour) and "her plots highlight the dependence of women on marriage to secure social standing". There are also some statements in the main text without citations: the romantic poets being quoted in JN's novels; Henry's marriage; "The period since WWII..."; the first para of the 21st century section. Tim riley talk 07:53, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are we close to resolving the question of the lead? I'll need to close the review one way or the other quite soon. Tim riley talk 18:18, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update version of lede

Jane Austen (/ˈdʒeɪn ˈɒstɪn/; 16 December 1775 – 18 July 1817) was an English novelist known principally for her five major novels which interpret, critique and comment upon the novels of sensibility of the end of the 18th century. Her most highly praised novel during her own lifetime was Pride and Prejudice which was her second published novel. Her plots often reflect upon the dependence of women on marriage in the pursuit of secure social standing and economic security.

Austen's main novels are rarely out of print today though they were first published anonymously and brought her little personal fame with only a few glancing reviews during her lifetime. A significant transition in her posthumous reputation as an author occurred in 1869, fifty-two years after her death, when her nephew published A Memoir of Jane Austen which effectively introduced her to a wider public and reading audience. Austen's most successful novel during her own lifetime was Pride and Prejudice which went through two editions during her own lifetime. Her third published novel was Mansfield Park which was largely overlooked by the professional reviewers though it was a great success with the public still within her lifetime.

All five of her major novels were published for the first time between 1811 and 1818. From 1811 until 1816, with the premiere publication of Sense and Sensibility (1811), Pride and Prejudice (1813), Mansfield Park (1814) and Emma (1815), she achieved success as a published writer. She wrote two additional novels Northanger Abbey and Persuasion, both published posthumously in 1818, and began another one, which was eventually titled Sanditon, but died before completing it.

During the twentieth and twenty-first centuries Austen's celebrated books have inspired a large number of critical essays as well as books of critical essays establishing her place as a prominent British author of international fame. Her books are often used to inspire the other cultural arts as well with numerous film productions of her novels starting as early as the 1940s with Laurence Olivier's production to new productions in the 21st century starring such leading actresses as Kiera Knightly, Kate Beckinsale and Chloe Savigny.

The article is looking better, but the lead still discusses things not mentioned in the main text. "Literary realism" for instance,

Literary realism as a term is currently linked to the Wikipedia article on this subject. The previous version referred to "realism" by itself which seemed less informative. With the link as specified, then readers can simply see the linked article for the definition of the term. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 20:05, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

and "her plots are fundamentally comic" (there is nothing in the text about comedy or humour)

The wording could be adapted here to refer to the novels being described as being studies in the comedy-of-manners genre. "Comedy" here is not to denote anything more that the sense of Comedia as used since classical literature, and not tragedy. The language could be adapted to "comedy of manners" novels if this is preferred for readers. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 20:05, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

and "her plots highlight the dependence of women on marriage to secure social standing".

Women in pursuit of a fortunate marriage is a recurrent theme in much of Austen. This phrase is often celebrated with the famous quote from the start of her most famous novel that it is well known that a man with a large fortune can be expected to want to search for a good wife. Possibly the quote from the novel in the article would clarify this literary trope in Austen. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 20:05, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are also some statements in the main text without citations: the romantic poets being quoted in JN's novels; Henry's marriage; "The period since WWII...";

Two citations have been added and the text shortened based on your previous comment. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 20:05, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

the first para of the 21st century section.

There are two citations added for that new first paragraph there. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 20:05, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also noting that I am archiving the short line about the disputed portrait as it more likely belongs on the art portrait page and not in this biography. The new updated rewrite lede sans cites now appears which has not been updated since 2013. Your added comments have been well targeted. Cheers. Fountains-of-Paris (talk) 20:05, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comments

Good. I think we're there. The lead and its relationship to the main text will now pass muster. I'd advise removing the WP:PEACOCK term "celebrated" from the last paragraph of the lead, and rephrasing the mention of Olivier to avoid giving the impression that he produced a Jane Austen film rather than starring in it. The biography is excellent; the illustrations are all duly licensed (and very good); the sourcing is wide and evidently authoritative. With the addition of a substantial analysis of the works this could well be a candidate for Featured Article in due course, but as it stands it meets the GA criteria, in my judgement, and I am pleased to promote it. Speaking as someone who has loved Austen's novels for nearly fifty years, I send warm congratulations to everyone who has contributed to this pleasing article. – Tim riley talk 14:10, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Well referenced.

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Well referenced.

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Well illustrated.

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Well illustrated.
Overall:
Pass or Fail: