Talk:Jaws (novel)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sadads (talk · contribs) 06:55, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Initial thoughts: though in general I think you cover a number of different pieces of information of note for the article, there are a few significant gaps, which would make the article immediately not pass GA (it needs to cover the "main aspects" of the topic): I have yet to do a close read for clarity/information organization/delivery, but I figure that any research to build up these two kinds of conversation, will lead to an expanded coverage in already developed sections. I will probably do a first pass later in the week. If you need help getting access to any research materials (especially scholarly ones) I have full access to a university research library, so should be able to supplement open access resources with almost anything (or get it through inter-library loan). Let me know via Special:EmailUser and I will email the sources to you if I have access to them through a database or when they come into a request. If you don't think you can do these revisions/expansion: let me know, and I will close the GA nomination as a fail. Thank you for the great work Sadads (talk) 06:55, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * the article hardly discusses the film adaptation. Typically, an article that discusses a book that was later adapted summarizes the key information from about the film in a section of its own; see for example, Divergent_(novel), The_French_Lieutenant%27s_Woman. or Harry_Potter_and_the_Philosopher%27s_Stone. Jaws led to a successful franchise: lacking discussion of that franchise is a serious gap. Most of that work is done for you on the Jaws (film) page: read the sources, pick the best information about the legacy/franchise, and summarize it in brief (how did the film do? who starred in it? What types of awards/response was created? Did it spawn merchandise and subsequent works?) In literary studies, the legacy of a work in its adaptations is absolutely critical to its value.
 * literary devices: theme, style, genre etc are missing; There is plenty of scholarship about the novel ( see the Google Scholar search), which suggests to me that their should be significant treatment of concepts like themes, style and genre and literary antecedents and precedents: What intertextual relationships are there between Jaws and works like Moby Dick? What themes pop up elsewhere in the scholarship? Why are they important to the novel? This doesn't have to be exhaustive (that would be FA) but at the very least, I would imagine concepts like Man vs. Nature and the perception and depiction of the non-human to be of interest thematically. How does the book relate to the thriller/horror genre? How does it push those boundaries stylistically? Both the reception and conception sections begin to cover these topics, but don't do so sufficiently to be considered covering these for this novel.

I split the adaptation section from the publication one (while merging reception), see if it's at least a start. igordebraga ≠ 18:11, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Many apologies for not rersponding sooner: that is a great start: the summary is very good, and the move to split the reception from the film, allows a better focus on some really important information! However, I am still thinking that a successful GA version of this article needs to cover the work better than a "conception, plot, reception" model of describing the work, especially considering the breadth of scholarship available about it. I would suggest looking at models like Divergent_(novel), The_Great_Lover_(novel) and The_French_Lieutenant%27s_Woman, which do good at beginning to highlight some of the major structural and thematic issues important to those particular jobs. More generally, if you are looking for ideal models for literary works, you could compare with Featured articles on the topic, for example,Pattern_Recognition_(novel) does a really good job surveying works' characteristics as a literary object. Sadads (talk) 17:07, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. Expanded as much as I could, tried writing a "style" section, see if it's enough. igordebraga ≠ 19:08, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * No worries: I have been very busy too. I am not awake enough to be doing close detail/revisions/copyediting issues right now. I will come through soon. If you don't see me making comments by next Thursday, ping me here on the page so that I remember to come back: I have a ton of things moving right now. My initial review of your edits see it as a great improvement. My first instincts say I might ask for some restructuring, but I want to come back to the page with a more open/awake mind. Sadads (talk) 00:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I am doing a copyedit pass: there are some significant wordiness/long sentence problems that make the communication unclear. Please review the changes I make for clarity of meaning within the original intentions. Also, I am leaving specific concerns in the sections below, Sadads (talk) 22:47, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I have left some more specific concerns: most of them are surface items, except for the "Themes and influences" section. The revisions you have made thus far, have created a miles better article! Keep up the great work! Please let me know if any of the points below need to be clarified,Sadads (talk) 00:01, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Comments
Organization, quality of narrative and focus, and sourcing all check out pretty well. I would recommend focusing on a few of the finer details below:

Plot

 * "Hendricks pulls a massive shark's tooth from one of the holes. " - is this a necessary plot detail?
 * Please fix the passive issue that I note with the Template:To Whom.
 * Although I cannot currently locate my copy of the novel and thus cannot provide the necessary citation, I believe the plot summary is incorrect regarding a sexual encounter between Ellen and Matt Hooper. They do go to lunch, and during that time, they make a fantasy about a sexual encounter, which imagines a motel where the rooms are separate cottages so they can have privacy for as loud as they might be.  Ellen thinks strongly about this, figuring that what he calls a "fantasy" is really something he intends to do, but to the best of my recollection, nothing actually does happen between them.  Brody later confronts Hooper about his whereabouts the day of the lunch, and he tells Brody he went to a motel with Daisy Wicker from the dinner party (whom Brody knows to be a lesbian, so he knows this is untrue).  But the situation, as far as I can recall, ends there -- and ends permanently when Hooper is killed.  Jsamans (talk) 20:51, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Development

 * "taking pictures of the ones lying on easels for cleaning." is this a neccessary detail: I am not able to picture this very well.... I would suggest cutting.
 * The two paragraphs in the Themes and Influence section don't make a lot of sense: they feel like a very random series of topics: the first talks about process in a way similar to the first paragraph of the development section and the second paragraph talks about intertextuality, literary style, genre and others. I am thinking some of the discussions of these topics could be expanded just based on the reviews you have in the review section, such as the comparison with other texts and the effectiveness of the horror/thriller/etc style/genre concerns in other parts of the reviews, and brought into greater concentration.

Film section

 * You mention a change of location, but you don't point to where (something you can draw from the article Jaws (film). )
 * Also, you talk alot about the script writing and Spielburgs involvement, but don't talk at all about the stars in the film. You emphasize the importance of changing characterization, in part this is something that is closely tied to who played the characters, I would think.

Images

 * Rights check out for everything: do you want to include the paperback cover image in the Title and Cover section, since its an item of commentary? It would meet Fair use.

Final thoughts
Done what I could, see if anything else is needed. igordebraga ≠ 19:05, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
 * The only thing lingering is the filming location concern I mention, which you should be able to draw from the film page, otherwise the last bit of revisions are look great! I took a look at the the diff and wow what a change! Great job! I hope this was a useful experience, I personally really like strong GA reviews with good constructive feedback, because it always feels like the article improves by leaps and bounds. I would strongly recommend thinking more about the themes and style section, seeing if you can tease out more of the opinions of critics to support a deeper discussion, but that shouldn't be an impediment to getting GA. I will be looking forward to that last fix, Sadads (talk) 14:51, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, if you insist, added where specifically in New England Jaws was filmed. Think it's done now. igordebraga ≠ 16:13, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * It seemed like a really important detail, that didn't require extra research (you describe it as a fundamental element of the adaptation's changes). Everything looks great! Approving, and moving up class! Thanks for the great review (and you should consider nominating it for WT:DYK: I am sure it would do really well, and is a great way to show off all the great work! Sadads (talk) 03:09, 27 March 2015 (UTC)