Talk:Shiloh (Naylor novel)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Mm40 (talk · contribs) 22:12, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cunard, it seems like you've waited long enough for a review. I haven't edited intensely for some time, but I've been lurking around GAN and noticed this article. A couple of weeks ago, I saw it at the top of the list and wondered why it had been sitting there. When I saw that Shiloh, which seems like it should pass easily, was still here today, I decided to just sit down and do it. My comments should be up by the end of they day. Thanks, Mm40 (talk) 22:12, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Mm40, for reviewing the article. I look forward to your comments. Cunard (talk) 22:23, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First read-through

Like I initially perceived, the article seems pretty solid. The things that might be big issues, like sourcing or completeness, seem to check out. My biggest concern is how the beginning of the body is organized.

The "Background and publishing" section: I don't think its first paragraph is relevant.
It seems like the "Setting" section can be split up, with the first paragraph being moved as a subsection in "Plot summary" and the other two paragraphs being moved into "Style."
The "Genres" subsection under "Style" is two short paragraphs of two sentences each
The third and fourth paragraphs of "Ethics" might be combined.

Ruminate on these suggestions; you obviously know the article much better than I do, so if they're absurd, feel free to say so. I'll finish the review when you've addressed them. Mm40 (talk) 22:46, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The first paragraph of the "Background and publishing" section provides biographical background about Naylor. I modeled it after To Kill a Mockingbird#Biographical background and publication. It shows the reader Naylor's path to becoming a writer and provides context about Naylor's writing style.
Let me ponder about this suggestion. It will be difficult to work the first paragraph of the "Setting" section into "Plot summary".
I have removed the "Gendres" subsection header.
Combined.

Thank you for this initial review, which has helped me improve the article's flow. I may be unable to address further comments until Monday or Tuesday, so I hope you can keep the GA review open until after then. Cunard (talk) 00:59, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have integrated the "Setting" section into the "Plot summary" and "Style" sections. To avoid bloating the plot, I included the information as a footnote. Cunard (talk) 04:20, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Status?

What is the status of this review? It has been open for nearly three weeks. Is it completed, or still waiting further comments? If it is completed, place it on hold while improvements are made to the article. AstroCog (talk) 15:06, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mm40 (talk · contribs) has not edited since 24 November, so the review is still waiting for further comments. Cunard (talk) 06:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm putting it back in the queue since Mm40's inactive. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:38, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]