Talk:The Coral Island/GA1
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk · contribs) 22:24, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
No real problems, and a very readable, enjoyable article. Although I confess that I'd never heard of the book or the author! My only minor issue is over in-text attribution of one or two quotes, but (if I understand the MoS correctly) you are perfectly entitled to disagree and say that they do not need attribution.
- "A stickler for accuracy, he subsequently only wrote about things of which he had personal experience.": Is this because he realised he got it wrong about coconuts? If so, maybe worth saying s explicitly.
- "dating books forward was a common practice at the time, especially during the Christmas period": It may be worth adding a reason, if this is known.
- "Ballantyne had a "deep religious conviction" and felt it his duty to educate Victorian middle-class boys – his target audience – in "codes of honour, decency, and religiosity"": I'm sure it is fine with MoS to leave short quotes like this without in-text attribution, but would it be worth adding who said this?
- I don't have any good working rule of thumb for this kind of question. My general answer is that if the reader wants to know who said something then clicking on the citation gives an instant answer. My main objection to in-text attribution of everything is that it can get rather boring having to keep saying "Critic XYZ says this, whereas critic PQR says that". To know that it was, for instance, Short who claimed that Ballantyne had a deep religious conviction (something that nobody would dispute) doesn't seem to me to add much, if anything, to the reader's understand of the subject. Therefore I tend to attribute in-text only when I'm including quotations from two different writers in a single sentence, or when I think the claim might be considered a rather bold one. Malleus Fatuorum 23:53, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
- "The novel exhibits a "light-hearted confidence" in its description of an adventure that was above all "fun"." And it may be worth attributing this.
- There are one or two other examples of quotes unattributed in the text. Again, not a big deal, and fine with MoS, but it seems a little disconcerting to find some quotes attributed and others not.
- "Modern critics have considered that the text features…": Any particular reason this is not just "Modern critics consider that the text features…"?
- "A simplified adaptation of the book was recommended for grades 7–9.": I'm never too sure of "grades", and there is potential for confusion. Maybe give ages instead?
- Is the book still on any reading lists that we know of?
- Tucker 1990 is lacking a publisher; and as a minor point, according to the google book preview, the coconut reference is on pp. 167–68.
- Other spot-checks fine.
- Images, links, etc are fine.
I will place this on hold for the moment, but these are very minor points. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:42, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Comment: One image licensing issue:
- File:Coral Island 1893.jpg does not have a valid US copyright tag.
Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 20:38, 21 December 2012 (UTC)