Talk:Klerykal fiction/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Piotrus (talk · contribs) 07:32, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Viriditas (talk · contribs) 00:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Summary: Lead could be tightened into paragraphs, although reads well. "Characteristics" section needs some work, mostly for organization and replacing italics with quotes (and cutting them back if necessary). At least one paragraph is missing sources, although it appears they are in the article already, they just need to be added. Consider rearranging the paragraphs, adding subsections, or something else. "Selected works" has similar issues. I've given extensive comments below. Spot-checks look good. Overall, the article is well done, but needs some minor work to bring it up to speed. On hold. Viriditas (talk) 02:54, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback

Formatting

Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Words as words: "Quotation is done with quotation marks, never italics, nor both at once".

This appears to be a relic of the initial import from pl:Klerykal fiction.[1]

Lead

Klerykal fiction...is a term for a subgenre of Polish fantasy and science fiction and broader religious fiction that addresses Christian themes.

This has me wondering if this is unique to Polish culture. In the US we have Christian apocalyptic fiction, some of which might be described as science fiction, but is generally considered a poorly written form of Christian pseudo-apologetics that is dismissed as nonsense, even by most Christians, as it is usually written to both proselytize and make money, not to seriously engage the reader in a discussion of the tenets of the faith using well crafted fictional conceits. It honestly reads like an AI wrote it and has almost no value as literature. The most notable example of this genre is the Left Behind series, which is some of the worst fiction ever written in the history of the United States, which is putting it mildly. In fact, if you wanted to torture someone, forcing them to read Left Behind is extremely cruel. The reason I bring this up is because I wouldn't want our readers to think Klerykal fiction has anything in common with that worst of all possible American genres...or does it?

I don't think you need three small paragraphs. Just merge it into one or two, or expand them.
Good job noting the formative works in the lead. Not enough articles do that.

Characteristics

I'm not a fan of the way this section is written, although I admit it is somewhat complex and muddied by different definitions so it isn't going to be easy to write. When I encounter this kind of complexity, the first thing I ask is whether it can be refined by bringing the narrative to the surface. In this example, we see that the very last paragraph delivers this narrative to the reader, when it should in fact be part of the first paragraph to enhance readability and comprehension. Once we do that, subsequent changes become much easier and the topics emerge and self-organize by themselves. By merging the last paragraph with the first in this section, the second paragraph now naturally follows, giving us an introduction to the different categories and definitions, beginning with criticism of the church as a defining criteria of the genre. Mazurkiewicz's criticism then naturally follows as its own criticism of the previous paragraph, etc. I think it's safe to say that many of these quotes can be paraphrased, shortened, or even eliminated to enhance the material. Consider the use of subsections if that might help.
Western novels critical of traditional religious models, such as Walter M. Miller's A Canticle for Leibowitz (1959)

Sorry, this raised a red flag for me. Miller was a religious Catholic and having read A Canticle for Leibowitz several times, I don't recall anything "critical" about traditional religious models in it, however, it was certainly critical, IIRC, of some elements of conservatism, hierarchy, etc, but religion? I don't recall that. I will take a look at the source for details. Given that they are in Polish, perhaps you could briefly explain why Miller is categorized or described in this way. I see that Marek Oramus provides some elucidation on this later (but not in reference to the novel), that I could agree with here. I think the problem here might be the wording of "critical of traditional religious models", which is somewhat nebulous. Take a look at the source and tell me what it says.

I am very confused by the use of Jacek Dukaj's characterization here, as he is considered "an early representative" of the genre, which according to his bio, "remains one of the most distinctive features of Dukaj's novels". It sounds like something was lost in translation here, because to my ear, it reads as if he is attacking himself, which of course doesn't make sense. Please revisit the sources to see if you can clear this up.
Olszański considered church criticism to be classic for Anglo-Saxon literature with Protestant (anti-Catholic) traditions.

Not exactly sure what this means. Perhaps it should be rewritten. Is Olszański referring to Old English literature? Anglo-Saxon literature occurred from the 5th-11th century. The Reformation occurred in the 16th century. Obviously, there's some language issues that need to be addressed here to form a more coherent narrative about the genre.

Mazurkiewicz also noted that many klerykal fiction works can be associated with liberal-left-wing view...

This entire paragraph lacks sources.

A common element of klerykal fiction is criticism of the church's excessive presence in (Polish) society. The church is often identified as a totalitarian institution and becomes a collective negative protagonist. Such works often have a satirical or grotesque character.[7][8][9][10]

Using four sources for these two sentences appears excessive. Best practice is just to choose the best source, one for each sentence.

They are classified as klerykal fiction because of their criticism of church institutions, but the church criticized by Ziemkiewicz is not the current church, but a warning against its degeneration into a church of pharisaism (false and hypocritical).

I think the parenthetical remark might be unnecessary. Christian culture popularized the term to mean "hypocritical", but I think linking to it without the parenthetical is fine. The article on Pharisees says that some Jews find the term antisemitic. I can't tell if the Polish is being used in that way, but what caught my eye was the use of the word "false" which seemed to deviate from its more common usage of "hypocritical".

Selected works

Dukaj also classified unspecified short stories by Maciej Żerdziński [pl] as klerykal fiction.

Why not put this in the first paragraph in that section instead of at the end of the list?

You only source some of the list, not all.

Notes

fantastyka klerykalna, fantastyka antyklerykalna..."fantastyka"...fantastika

Shouldn't these terms be italicized?

References

In Praise of Clerical Fiction". Young Clergy Women International

This should read: Partee, Mariclair (3 January 2012) "In Praise of Clerical Fiction". Fidelia. YCWI.

Spot-checks

2a: Checked
5abcd: Checked
6abc: Checked
7abcdefg: Checked

Images

No issues