Talk:Warriors: Omen of the Stars

Warriors: Omen of the Stars was nominated as a good article in the Language and literature category but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: September 25, 2015

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Warriors: Omen of the Stars article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Novels: Fantasy Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fantasy task force.

Children's literature Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks you can do:

Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks.

Add {{Portal|Children's literature}} to the See also section of related articles.
Tag the talk pages of related articles with {{WikiProject Children's literature}}
Join WikiProject Children's literature and list yourself as a Participant in the project.
Cleanup: A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.
Deletion discussions: listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature
Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
Rate the Unassessed articles in the Children's literature WikiProject.
References: Add references to Unreferenced BLPs.
Requested articles: Create a requested article on literature
Stubs: Improve a stub-class article

edit

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Warriors B‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Warriors, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Warriors, Seekers, Survivors and Bravelands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WarriorsWikipedia:WikiProject WarriorsTemplate:WikiProject WarriorsWarriors articles

B

This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

WikiProject Warriors tasks you can do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Every book in the main arcs of Warriors, Seekers, Survivors, and Bravelands, an article for the Bamboo Kingdom series
Expand : The Sun Trail, Kate Cary, Cherith Baldry, Victoria Holmes, Wayne McLoughlin
Wikify : Starlight (novel), Twilight (Hunter novel), Sunset (novel), Long Shadows (Hunter novel), Sunrise (novel)

Animals in media (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animals in media, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Animals in mediaWikipedia:WikiProject Animals in mediaTemplate:WikiProject Animals in mediaAnimals in media articles

Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.

Copied The Fourth Apprentice (history) → Warriors: Omen of the Stars (diff)
Copied Fading Echoes (history) → Warriors: Omen of the Stars (diff)
Copied Night Whispers (history) → Warriors: Omen of the Stars (diff)
Copied Sign of the Moon (history) → Warriors: Omen of the Stars (diff)
Copied The Forgotten Warrior (history) → Warriors: Omen of the Stars (diff)
Copied The Last Hope (Warriors) (history) → Warriors: Omen of the Stars (diff)

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[List of Warriors characters#Ivykit|Ivykit]] The anchor (Ivykit) has been deleted.
[[List of Warriors characters#Jay's Wing|Jay's Wing]] The anchor (Jay's Wing) has been deleted.
[[List of Warriors characters#Squirrelflight|Squirrelflight]] The anchor (Squirrelflight) has been deleted.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

references

Just a comment on the list of references - a lot are repeated refs to the individual books, maybe due to the large no. of articles that have been copied into this article? - if they were cleaned up ie. a ref no. with letters as a child lit article assessor, i would be inclined to increase from a 'c' to 'b' (of course, after it has a stronger reception section as well:)) Coolabahapple (talk) 05:24, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The repeats are references for separate webpages all with the same title. Generally, these are separate references for paperback, hardcover, and ebook release dates. As for reception, I'm not sure if much more exists. You're welcome to look, of course, as there may be reviews I may have missed. Bramble claw x 20:35, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Warriors: Omen of the Stars/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Johanna (talk · contribs) 19:04, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Third on my "to review" list. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)^{talk to me!}_{see my work} 19:04, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I highly doubt that this will pass. I've currently added a tag (for over reliance on primary sources). However, I will give you seven days to address concerns. In addition, if you want me to fail it for now and work on it outside of the process before renominating, that is fine as well. Anyways, here are my comments:

The lead does not adequately summarize several sections of the article's contents.
Could you please explain which sections do not appear to be adequately summarized? Bramble claw x 15:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, reception. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)^{talk to me!}_{see my work} 21:29, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Though the Warriors series has appeared on the New York Times Bestseller List, none of the novels in Warriors: Omen of the Stars has won a significant literary award." This information is either not notable "not won a significant literary award" or about the series, not the novel, and must be cited. Also, the bestseller list doesn't count as a literary award, so the two are not related at all.
I'm not sure I understand this comment. Could you clarify what you mean here? Bramble claw x 15:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I mean that the fact that it has appeared on the bestseller list must be cited, but that on its own is not relevant to this article. The fact that this series hasn't appeared is not notable at all. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)^{talk to me!}_{see my work} 21:29, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In "Inspiration and Influences" these seem to be about the series as a whole, not this story arc at all, which would be better placed in the main series article than here.
Cut. Bramble claw x 15:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That section is also much too short to be a standalone level two header section.
The publication history section just reads like a list of dates, which doesn't meet the "reasonably well-written" criterion of the good article criteria.
How would you suggest re-writing this section? Are you proposing the use of a table? Bramble claw x 15:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That section also is all primary sources--is there anything else you could cite to?
I think the use of primary sources (the publisher's website) here is justified, as they are used only to reference factual information: publication dates. Bramble claw x 15:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The plot summaries could probably use a copy edit for encyclopedic tone, repetition, and the like. It's not terrible, but the later ones especially are a bit all over the place.
Done. More detailed feedback is always welcome, of course. Bramble claw x 17:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The reception section is all over the place as well, with reviews being from all different books, meaning that the reader of the article gets no sense of coherency from the section whatsoever.
The reception section notes two reviews for book 1, one review for book 4, then a general summary of a set of reviews for all six books by the same reviewer. The other way I can think of organizing this would be to split that last six into order by each book, but that would get repetitive. Do you have any suggestions? Bramble claw x 17:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just make sure we know which books you're talking about. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)^{talk to me!}_{see my work} 21:29, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The themes section is much too short to be a standalone section, and I believe that it is unnecessary, as it is not like the themes have been discussed relatively widely or something (i.e. my articles Boys Don't Cry (film) or "A Trip to the Dentist"). This could all go in the reviews.
Merged with reception. Bramble claw x 17:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good move, but at this point, the merging made it really choppy. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)^{talk to me!}_{see my work} 21:29, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The vague "reviewers" here aren't helpful, as these opinions are from one reviewer.
Fixed. Bramble claw x 17:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On hold for seven days. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)^{talk to me!}_{see my work} 03:45, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I'm afraid that the comments have not been adequately addressed. The fixes, while they made the article better, really show that the article is nothing more than a list of dates, plot synopses, and a couple of reviews. The scope's not nearly wide enough. Also, I'm not sure why some of the plot synopses are so much longer than others. The primary sources tag is definitely still valid as 38 of the 44 refs are. Best of luck to you on this article and all your work on WP. I would also just like to say that it's not clear whether the reviews are positive or negative. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)^{talk to me!}_{see my work} 21:29, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Just because of the primary sources thing
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Covers of individual books would be nice as well as some free files where appropriate
Overall:
Pass/Fail: