Talk:Literary devices in The Lord of the Rings/GA1

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

Reviewer: CipherSleuth (talk · contribs) 02:09, 15 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for taking this on. I'll respond to your comments today, but will have less availability over the weekend. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:38, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Nice job on the article. I'll go over it a couple more times to check against the GA criteria, but looks in excellent shape. If I find anything else I will let you know, otherwise, I anticipate passing the article. CipherSleuth (talk) 21:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I am planning to review the article. I have pasted preliminary comments below. CipherSleuth (talk) 02:09, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Small fixes:
 * The first time Jungian archetype is used in the character pairing section, there is no wiki-link.
 * Added.


 * Reference 5 appears dead. I click on it but says resource not found.
 * Archived.

More general comment:


 * The character Gollum is pictured at the beginning with the caption: “The scholar Brian Rosebury considers Tolkien's narrative portrayal of Gollum (pictured) his most memorable success.” After reading that caption with mention of "most memorable", I thought there would be discussion of Gollum in article, but there’s only a brief mention of Gollum in the character pairing section. I wonder if there is an opportunity to add about literary devices connected to Gollum e.g., if any of the sources talk about symbolism or metaphor regarding that character.
 * Yes, added in 'Prose style'.
 * In the prose section, it says that the prose style was "attacked" by Stimpson and Raffel. There's a mention of Stimpson's criticism (who thought the diction was too complex) but no mention of what problem Raffel had with the prose. Might be worth adding a sentence with additional criticism from Raffel.
 * Added.


 * Part of one of the sentences in the lead is a little challenging and might not be that accessible to the reader. Specifically this: "...a sequence of tableaux, a complex edifice, multiple spirals...". I don't know if this can be simplified any for the lead or add a wiki-link to tableaux. On the other hand, I guess the argument could be made that the reader just has to scroll down to learn more.
 * Linked and glossed.

Reviewer has checked the article against the GA criteria, including examining references, prose, and images. Nominator has addressed concerns outlined above. Article passes.
 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: