Talk:Joyce Kilmer/GA2

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: SilkTork (talk · contribs) 14:13, 25 August 2012 (UTC) I'll start reading over the next few days and then begin to make comments. I am normally a slow reviewer - if that is likely to be a problem, please let me know now. I tend to directly do copy-editing and minor improvements, though if there is a lot of work needed I may suggest getting a copy-editor. Anything more significant than minor improvements I will raise here. I see the reviewer's role as collaborative and collegiate, so I welcome discussion regarding interpretation of the criteria. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:13, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pass. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 16:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tick box[edit]

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:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

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

Comments on GA criteria[edit]

Pass

Images and captions are OK. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:28, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Stable. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:33, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Has az reference section. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:34, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Prose is clear and conveys meaning. I am copy-editing as I work through, and prose can always be tidied or improved, but as it stands it is fine - nobody is likely to get confused. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:58, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mos. The lead meets GA criteria as it picks up succinctly the main points raised in the article. As part of ongoing development, some additional detail could be added to give readers a better understanding of the topic. Many readers don't go beyond the lead. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:11, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
NPOV. Fair and balanced. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:34, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sources check out. Article is decently supported by reliable sources. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Original research. Sources and encyclopaedias I've consulted match what is in this article. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Broad coverage. Possibly more for later development, but one source mentions that "Tree" was set to music in Whimsical Whimsies by Kilmer's mother, and this made it even more popular. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:37, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Focus. Again, this is more in the way of airing a query, rather than a firm objection. There is a paragraph on Kilmer's conversion to Catholicism. Is this too much? SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:40, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fail

General comments[edit]

influences = Metaphysical poets, Algernon Charles Swinburne, Gerald Manley Hopkins, Ernest Dowson, Aubrey Beardsley, William Butler Yeats, A.E. Housman, Edwin Arlington Robinson, Coventry Patmore, Francis Thompson, Alice Meynell, Viola Meynell, Francis Meynell

Isn't that rather a long list for a person who isn't known for their literary skill, but for having simply written a popular poem? SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:46, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's a lot of direct quotation in the article. This is not a GA issue, but is a stylistic one. There are differences of opinion regarding use of quotations - how long and how many. The guidance essay - Wikipedia:Quotations - is worth looking at. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:52, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is a tendency to short paragraphs, particularly in the Years of writing and faith section. This can inhibit flow. Advice will vary on the appropriate length of a paragraph - but worth looking at Wikipedia:Layout#Paragraphs to get a general idea. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:55, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pass[edit]

My queries regarding focus and broad coverage are quite minor, and are not significant enough to hold up this GAN. They can be considered as part of ongoing development.

This is a useful article on a minor literary figure who was both popular and prolific in his day, and who continues to attract attention with his simplistic yet popular poem "Trees". The article presents the key information of his life and work in an accessible yet reliable manner. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 16:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]