Talk:The Tale of the Flopsy Bunnies/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sadads (talk) 00:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC) A little about myself: I am an English and History undergrad, with all kinds of crazy interests. Though I have not done much with Children's literature, but I am active in WikiProject Novels, I hope to help in as many ways as possible. I do have a real life, and this review may take up to a week, I will make comments below in sections for you to respond to and a checklist of the GA nomination requirements, which I and only I will check off. I tend to do my reviews very thoroughly because I see GA as a stepping stone to FA, so this review will be a combination of a peer review and a GA review: I will examine every line and (likely) request many changes. If I am for some reason neglecting this review contact me on my talk page or if I am not reviewing this article properly, feel free to request a new reviewer, Sadads (talk) 00:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Checklist
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality: ✅
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: ✅
 * 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: ✅
 * 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: ✅
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: ✅
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: ✅
 * Pass or Fail: ✅

Lead
✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 19:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC) ✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 19:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC) ✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 19:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC) ✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 21:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC) ✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 19:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "reprises" is used inproperly, it, generally, is used in regards to redoing actions (see http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/reprise#English). Though it may make sense in antiquated english, we are writing for a modern crowd,Sadads (talk) 00:29, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "In Flopsy Bunnies, Benjamin Bunny and his cousin Flopsy are the parents of six bunnies called simply the Flopsy Bunnies. " is unclear, did they have kids? Are they just acting as parents? did they become a couple before hand? Very vague and hard to understand,Sadads (talk) 00:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "captures the bunnies" which bunnies? All of the children? Benjamin bunny too?Sadads (talk) 00:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "Potter had grown tired of drawing rabbits" - vague statement, leaves me asking very many questions, when? after the last book? why? Sadads (talk) 00:36, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "Following its publication though, she would concentrate on domesticated animals rather than wild animals of field and forest." -sounds like archaic English, modernize for the modern reader!Sadads (talk) 00:40, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Lead reads much better, good job, Sadads (talk) 23:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Background
✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 19:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "a quantity of sketches" What the heck does that mean? Quantity? group of sketches? several sketches? Think modern readership, It makes sense in 19th and 18th century prose, but not here, Sadads (talk) 00:53, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Composition and publication
✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 21:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC) ✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 21:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC) ✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 21:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC) ✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 18:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC) ✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 18:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC) ✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 18:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC) ✅ Susanne2009NYC (talk) 18:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "it is known that Benjamin Bunny was set at Fawe Park in Keswick." - clarify either who knows it or why the scholarship points to these (how do we know this statement?), Sadads (talk) 01:00, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "Potter was always at her best with rabbits and gardens, and the story provided her with exactly the sort of painting she enjoyed", I thought the lead said she didn't like doing the rabbit stories, Sadads (talk) 01:09, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The quote " "The garden is very large, two-thirds surrounded by a red brick wall with many apricots, and an inner circle of old grey apple trees on espaliers. It is very productive but not tidy, the prettiest kind of garden, where bright old-fashioned flowers grow amongst the currant bushes."" is very random, either put it in context or get rid of it, Sadads (talk) 01:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Read the third paragraph aloud and rewrite it, making sure it actually says what you want it to say. Very, very, very clumsy, Sadads (talk) 01:15, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Recommend acrediting the reviewer that points out "in contrast, Flopsy Bunnies represents Potter's masterful depiction of rabbits in full flower." with something like "As NAME points out, Flopsy Bunnies...." It helps with the WP:NPOV, unlike traditional Literature writing, we need to be careful not to take a position on the goodness or badness of any one work. We can represent the scholarly consensus as the scholarly consensus, for example in Quicksilver (novel) when I wrote "The reception to Quicksilver was generally positive. Some reviewers found the length cumbersome at times; however, others found the length impressive in its quality and entertainment value." in the Critical reception section, I am careful to point out that it is not the Wikipedian author that is pointing this out but rather reviewers in general, Sadads (talk) 13:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "little books"? What are little books? You don't mention any little books before. Sketch books? Middle of fourth paragraph.Sadads (talk) 13:20, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * "The picture of the Flopsy Bunnies asleep beneath a letture probably pays homage to a similar picture by Edward Lear in his The History of the Seven Families of Lake Pipple-popple depicting guinea pigs who, in their haste to feed, bump their noses on a lettuce and fall down dead.[6]" is long and wordy, see if you can break it into two sentences.Sadads (talk) 13:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Style and themes

 * I renamed this section because it better reflects what is in here. However, the section is very ADD, doesn't really focus on anything in particular, and doesn't have a sense of flow. I would almost break the section into sections on basic literary elements, like themes and style just so it easier for the reader to anticipate what will happen in the section. This section really needs some focus and direction to it to really make it approachable. I think this is probably one of my last issues with the article, otherwise it is very well put together, Sadads (talk) 02:38, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments on recent expansion
Saw that you are doing some major revamping work of the themes and style, it looks pretty good. I also saw the addition of the Characters section, I strongly suggest that you don't include that section. If the scholarship deals with the characters, I would suggest adding that information into the Plot section, theme section or into the individual character pages linked to from the plot. Characters sections are largely unnecessary, when the information makes more sense in the context of other sections, Sadads (talk) 18:58, 3 September 2010 (UTC)


 * In "Themes" "Kutzer notes that the Flopsy Bunnies belongs not to the titular characters but to their parents – it is they who save the baby bunnies – and thus the story is often of less interest to children." doesn't have a citation, I am assuming it should be #15, Sadads (talk) 21:10, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not sure if I completely understand the idea of a "rambling old house" in "illustrations", Sadads (talk) 21:13, 5 September 2010 (UTC)