Talk:Madman's Drum/GA1

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

Reviewer: LT910001 (talk · contribs) 02:58, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

If there are no objections, I'll take this review. I'll note at the outset I've had no role in editing or creating this article. I welcome other editors at any stage to contribute to this review. I will spend a day familiarising myself with the article and then provide an assessment. While you wait, why not spare a thought for the other nominees, and conduct a review or two yourself? This provides excellent insight into the reviewing process, is enjoyable and interesting. A list can be found here Kind regards, LT910001 (talk) 02:58, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for waiting. In conducting this review, I will:
 * Provide an assessment using WP:GARC
 * If this article does not meet the criteria, explain what areas need improvement.
 * Provide possible solutions that may (or may not) be used to fix these.

Commentary
An overall excellent article. I think this article could do with a little more expansion on the plot, particularly if there was a curse on the family (the second source) and some more information about the vacuous life of the son (see the first source), or at least fleshed out to a paragraph; and perhaps some sentences written on the use of symbolism and other visual techniques by the author. I haven't had the opportunity to read this very interesting wordless novel, but had a perusal of some websites:
 * 
 * (one of the sources).

Other than that, I am sure this article will be promoted. Kind regards, --LT910001 (talk) 01:59, 22 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for taking on this review! I've added the bit about the cursed family to the plot summary, and I've also added a couple of other things to the "Style and analysis" and "Legacy" sections from the same du9 article—it took some work to wrap my head around the author's points.  I'd seen the tashqueedagg article, but as it's an anonymous blog post I'm afraid it would fail as a reliable source, though it certainly would be nice to have more sources to flesh out these articles a bit. Curly Turkey (gobble) 06:05, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your prompt replies. Yes, to be clear I am not advocating for those to be used as sources in the article, but as I don't have access to physical sources, I have had to make do with these to give me some indication about plot and styles. With your edits article is above GA requirements and am promoting it. Well done! --LT910001 (talk) 03:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)