Talk:Plants in Middle-earth/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Artem.G (talk · contribs) 16:30, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi Chiswick Chap, I would be reviewing this article!
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
· · · |
There are not many comments from me here, the article is really well-written (as almost all Tolkien-related aricles), though I will add some comments.
- " of frozen cold lessen in his side;" - should probably be a full stop?
- OK, let's risk it!
- "...Early in the history of Arda, he introduced the Two Trees of Valinor..." - maybe "Tolkien introduce", as he wasn't mentioned in this section previously
- Done.
- "Stéphanie Loubechine describes the opposing roles" - she needs some introduction
- Glossed.
- "Curry comments however that Tolkien's trees are never just symbols, also being individuals in the narrative." - I don't really understand how the trees are individuals in the narrative, maybe this idea can be expanded somehow?
- Good idea. Extended the Curry section, adding examples and quotations.
- "David Galbraith of the Royal Botanical Gardens (Ontario) " - is he a botanist there? I don't know whether any clarification is needed, I'm fine with current phrasing, just curious.
- Yes, he's the head of science there.
- External links: first link is duplicate of wikibooks, and about the second one - maybe the book it is about can be added as "Further reading" with the link as a ref? I think that by itself the link doesn't add anything to the topic, but the book is related.
- Removed. We don't need it in Further reading as well.
- And just a question - maybe some section about the Ents should be included? They are not "plants", but they are trees, so in my view they should be at least mentioned.
- Mentioned and wikilinked Ents and Treebeard.
All the images are appropriately licensed, fair use rationals provided. Sources are well-structured, though I'll take a day or two to check quotes. That's all for now, will return to it tomorrow. Artem.G (talk) 16:30, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the review. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:12, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for quick response! The expansion on individual trees is great, and the article seems to be in a very nice shape. I've checked several references and everything is ok; and I think it's a pass Thanks for a great article! Artem.G (talk) 08:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the review. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:12, 2 January 2022 (UTC)