Talk:Shaker, Why Don't You Sing?/GA1

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

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 14:08, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Will review this evening.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  14:08, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Lead


 * "of alternating" = alternating


 * Background
 * Repetition of "she" in second paragraph, change some to Angelou.


 * Themes
 * In "The Lie", for example, the speaker feels compelled to use deception to protect herself from her lover's abandonment. Speaker? you mean the protagonist?
 * I suppose I do. It's my understanding that when discussing poetry, it's customary to call the person the poet is taking the perspective of as the "speaker".


 * "The rest of the poems in Shaker emphasize determination despite the "unabiding anguish over the oppression of the black race",and deal with the cruel treatment of slaves in the South." - attribute quote and source?
 * All the above are addressed, thanks.


 * Reviews
 * "She finds the best poems in Shaker are the ones that are structured like blues music." Speaking as a blues guitarist myself, I'm intrigued as to why she thinks this? Can you elaborate a little?♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld
 * The review, which is very short, doesn't go into a lot of detail explaining what's meant. There is an answer to your question, though, which I suspect is of a personal nature.  I recently found a new source about Angelou, and there's a chapter in it about how Angelou uses the blues form not only in her poetry, but throughout her writings.  One of my goals in improving Angelou articles is to write a new article about her poetry, but I have some research I need to do beforehand.  Personally, I think the bluesy aspect of Angelou's articles is one of the more interesting aspects of it, and one of the reasons her poetry is not as high regarded as you'd think.  Much of her poetry is best set to music, most critics say, even the ones that disparage her.  I don't think that this article is the place to go into that, but know that it's something I mean to address in other ways.  Thanks for the review, I appreciate your help as always. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:47, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

That's OK.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  18:16, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

Looks fine for GA, good job.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  18:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)