Talk:The Great Gatsby/GA2

GA Reassessment

DELISTED

Good article status removed over copyright violation concerns. Could be addressed with only minor effort but has been long enough that perhaps article should be re-reviewed anyway. Jason Quinn (talk) 00:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

The article has copyright violation issues that need to be resolved. I was the person who got the article up to GA status. I believe it should be delisted and quickly. Jason Quinn (talk) 04:37, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jason Quinn: Just a reminder that this is still open. AIRcorn (talk) 09:36, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the talk page the main issue with the plot seems to have been sorted. I ran Earwigs tool over it to be safe and it had a higher than I would like return. However most are fine as they are quoted or simple enough phrases. This is probably the dodgiest. We have our article vs a New York Times one (so unlikely they copied us)

Despite this, he refused an offer of $10,000 for the serial rights in order not to delay the book's publication vs At the same time he refused an off of $10,000 for the serial rights in order not to delay the book's publication.
By October, when the original sale had run its course, the book had sold fewer than 20,000 copies. Despite this, Scribner's continually kept the book in print; they carried the original edition on their trade list until 1946, by which time Gatsby was in print in three other forms and the original edition was no longer needed. vs Nor did the sales of "Gatsby" suggest any general recognition of its nature: by October, when the original sale had run its course, it was still short of 20,000. and Scriber's kept it in print; they carried the original edition on their trade list until 1946, by which time "Gatsby" was in print in three other forms and the original edition was no longer needed.

The republication of Gatsby in Edmund Wilson's edition of The Last Tycoon in 1941 produced an outburst of comment, vs This was about the state of opinion when Fitzgerald's death late in 1940 and the republication of "Gatsby" in Edmund Wilson's edition of "The Last "Tycoon" in 1941 produced an outburst of comment.

These are not terribly bad, but given the plot copying I would not feel comfortable keeping this good unless they are resolved. AIRcorn (talk) 21:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Delist it shall be. Jason Quinn (talk) 23:41, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.