Wikipedia:Peer review/The Ballad of the White Horse/archive1
This is an article about an epic poem. The biggest problem is that all of the analysis is written by myself, and thus has no references. The poem is so obscure that hardly any written interpretations have been published. I am aware of one, but this would mean basing all of the analysis on a single publication. Of course, the alternative is what I have written, but I have prefaced it by saying that it is the standard Catholic interpretation (which I believe to be true, based on the text: most is fairly obvious). What do you all think? Comment about anything else you can think of. APAULCH 01:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- No original research allowed. If that were the case, then wikipedia would not be an encyclopedia. Still, the article looks impressive. However, what may be "obvious" to you may not be the same to other people. Please find references. Zuracech lordum 10:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- In fact, it is succintly written. Zuracech lordum 10:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Will do, thanks APAULCH 13:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- I found some articles on the MLA database. Awadewit 22:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- G.K. Chesterton is important enough as an author that I can't believe that no one has subjected his works or career to a critical study; you should be able to find something about him either at a local library or thru ILL. And Chesterton is handling a subject that has drawn the attention of other novelists (e.g., Alfred Duggan also wrote a novel about king Alfred, the title of which I can't remember at the moment). Lastly, Chesterton is introducing details that are obviously out anacronistic (for example, take a look at Holger Danske, aka Ogier) -- I think you can point this out without running afoul of the original research ban. -- llywrch 21:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)