Wikipedia:Peer review/The Ruins of Gorlan/archive1

The Ruins of Gorlan

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to make this article a GA or A class. Things I want done

• I want a grammar and punctuation check.
• I also want a full read over.
• Do whatever you can to make this article better.

Thanks, UserDarkJak495 talk orange 00:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: I think you need to go to this WP page and study some of the book articles that have made it to GA. That will give you a better idea of what the requirements are for a book Good Article - though even here, some are much better than others. Meanwhile, here are a few comments on the article as it stands now:-

Lead: The lead is too short, and needs to be expanded to summarise the whole article.

Concept and development

• "...decided to write them into a full-length novel." The verb "write" sounds wrong; perhaps "write them up..."?
• "Horace disappears" What does this mean? Disappears magically, whooosh! or merely disappears from the stories?
• "on the boar hunt" → "on a boar hunt".
• "rehabilitate" does not need to be in quotes
• "which was not in the original stories and was later incorporated into the novel." The "and" conjunction is wrong here. A possible rephrasing would be: "which, although not in the original stories, was later incorporated into the novel."
• "He planned this parallel storyline in Battleschool to develop and show how Horace could help Will through his 'linear thinking'". I don't know what this means. What is "Battleschool", and what is meant by "linear thinking"?
• "Flanagan was careful to make the distinction that Horace was not stupid..." No "distinction" there. Possibly "careful to make it clear that..."

Plot

• "Will" needs to properly identified in the plot summary. Likewise "Sir Rodney" and "the Baron"
• I am confused by this plot summary. In the Concept and development section the relationship between Will and Horace seems central to the story, yet the plot summary does not mention Horace.

Further points

• Book articles, particularly those at GA or above, tend to have "Character" sections in which the main characters in the novel are briefly discussed
• The Critcal reception section should be considerably expanded, and should be placed before the Audiobook information which is of minor importance. Phrases like "People consider..." should be avoided.
• Apart from how the critics received the book, what was the publlc's reaction ,as expressed for example in sales figures?
• Referencing does not look strong, and attention is needed to formats.

Brianboulton (talk) 00:31, 8 February 2011 (UTC)