Talk:Coming of Age in Karhide/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Sagecandor (talk · contribs) 14:34, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

I'll do this one. Sagecandor (talk) 14:34, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Sagecandor, many thanks for picking up the review. I'm afraid my participating on Wikipedia is going to be severely limited during the next ten days, and I would ask your indulgence with respect to responding to any comments during this period. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 12:40, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Successful good article nomination
I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of December 21, 2016, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?: I've actually read the book The Left Hand of Darkness for a science fiction English literature class. I was pleasantly surprised to see this short story article. I see the nominator is the same editor that took that book article to Featured Article -- most impressive. The writing style here is excellent, not just good. It is a short story, so I see no problem with the article size or intro size here. I would maybe perhaps just expand the intro section a wee bit more here, mentioning specifically a couple of the individual reviewers and perhaps a summary of their individual thoughts briefly.
 * 2. Verifiable?: Every single thing is cited to appropriate references with good job on the citation style for both the References and Sources sections. I especially like that the Plot section is all backed up to citations, great job here.
 * 3. Broad in coverage?: For a short story article, this article has sections equivalent to a good article for a novel or film. Setting, Plot, Themes, Publication and Reception, good References and Sources sections. Good job on thoroughness here.
 * 4. Neutral point of view?: Every assertion in the article is backed up appropriately to sources. I've read the book The Left Hand of Darkness and I'm familiar with the author and the genre. It is a matter of fact tone and yes the article gives a good neutral presentation.
 * 5. Stable? Talk page not very active, one question from August 2016, answered politely. Article edit history stable going back to July 2016.
 * 6. Images?: No images used. Suggest a free-use image of the author.

Overall, a good article. Maybe more research could be done for further expansion, I'm not sure. Can expand the intro. Can add a free-use image of the author. I personally haven't done the research into additional scholarly sources to see if there's anything else that can be done towards featured article. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it Good article reassessed. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. — Sagecandor (talk) 18:10, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * many thanks for the review. I think your suggestions are excellent ones, and since I have internet access again, I will implement them shortly. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 14:50, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * And done. Thanks again.