Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Peer review/Fontamara

Fontamara[edit]

Hello - I would like your thoughts on this please. I know there is still work to be done, and I am currently reading a book which I hope to contribute to this at some point, but I'd like an impartial opinion on my writing, the sections - whether they are too long and detailed? Whether as a reader you feel it lacks something essential? Whether it flows well. etc General thought really. Would be very much appreciated.

Thanks Cutiekatie (talk) 15:19, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about writing the comments previously. I had started something and lost it when I closed my browser a little too quickly! 3 things strike me as really needing improvement:

The sections Characters and Themes hinge mostly on Quotations directly from the book and analysis of those quotations, which is Original Research. We have a policy on Wikipedia called WP:No Original Research which is paired with the policy WP:Verifiability. On Wikipedia we want to use opinions about a subject already published by experts in the field. For better examples on how this is done, see The Great Lover (novel), Quicksilver (novel), The Red Badge of Courage, Jonathon Strange and Mr. Norrell and The Sun Also Rises, all of which are peer reviewed high quality content on Wikipedia. Remember on Wikipedia we are looking for Verifiability not truth.
The section World Reaction needs to have more then just quotes and be more prose oriented. A series of quotes is used to sell a novel, a summary of opinions is a Wikipedia style analysis of the literary criticism available.
The lead should not have very many direct references, but rather should be summarizing the rest of the article per WP:LEAD.

I will give a more nitpicky analysis of the article, with more subsection by subsection comments once you handle these which are really critical for good Wikipedia article writing, perhaps during a GA review at WP:GAN. The samples I gave you are 2 Good Articles (WP:GA) and 3 Featured Articles (WP:FA), so should be a good model for all three problems. Sadads (talk) 13:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]