User talk:Jesse R Long/sandbox

5 Potential Articles

 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Story_of_King_Arthur_and_His_Knights
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Persuasion_(novel)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Shakespeare_Company
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flannery_O%27Connor
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victorian_literature

Comprehensive Assessment of Articles
The Story of King Arthur and His Knights This article is apart of two Wikiprojects which center around broadening the information available on novel and children's literature. The purpose of this article is to provide a description of the plot, the characters, and the history of the book. The audience will probably be people looking for general information about the book before reading it. The information in it could be used as a source foe summary information, and would most likely be used by readers or those interested in Arthurian Literature. The book is not really made for a wide audience as it is written in older English. The article does provide summaries of the various stories in the book, but it provides very little background information on the author and the time period in which it was published. The article also lacks information about the characters and themes of the book, which is essential to the basic outline of articles about novels. Although the article's talk page is vacant, the talk pages for both WikiProjects this article is involved in could prove useful in the editorial process.

For the article, I need to start by creating a better description of the novel. I then need to move into editing the plot summaries of the various stories. The tone and language usage throughout the article is jumbled; as it stands the article uses both informal and formal tones, active and passive voice, and weak sentence structures. However, I think by including references to relevant articles, reorganizing the summaries, and making the language more consistent, I can greatly improve the article. I think the information in the summaries might also help me create a general character list, which could be improved by future editors. I need to be aware of how much content I generate; I think I could get swept away in trying to make the article perfect rather than trying to improve what's there.

Persuasion This article is apart of three WikiProjects for novels: 19th century, romance, and women writers. All three projects have similar structures for their articles. There needs to be a plot summary, character lists, and sections dedicated to the novel's literary aspects/significance. The purpose of this article is to give a general overview of Jane Austen's Persuasion. The article does have a lot of useful information, but it could be broken up into more sections and/or removed from the article. There are some language inconsistencies and some incorrect information, but overall the article is at a good starting point for revisions. The last edits were in 2018, but the talk pages for the WikiProjects may be a good source for editing help/information. For the article, I need to go through first and rearrange the sections in a more cohesive order. I can then go through and create subsections for information and/or removed repeated information. I also need to work on language consistencies. The article has both informal and formal tones and some sections with incorrect information/citing inconsistencies. I think it’s going to be beneficial to work from the outside in on this article. The "Literary Significance and Criticism" section may be the most difficult to work with because of all of the information in the section. I am also going to have to heavily focus on the plot description because of its length. Both sections could be more effective through shorter descriptions. Jesse R Long (talk) 21:38, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Persuasion
The Persuasion article I am editing has the basic components necessary for the three WikiProjects it is apart of. However, the organization could be improved my moving the “themes” section to follow the “main characters” section. After themes, I would order the following sections as “development of the novel,” “early drafts,” and “publication history.” This organization would better follow a sequential order of events while putting the most important information for a general audience at the forefront of the article. I think the “themes” section needs a lot of work. As it is, the majority of the information there concerns the title of the work, which would fit better in the “publication history section.” The “literary significance and criticism” section is too detailed, and the writing reads like a persuasive argument. The information could be edited to better convey a neutral tone. The lead section could be reorganized to better convey the organization of the entire document. I would switch the position of the first and second paragraph of the lead section.

The Story of King Arthur and His Knights
The article about The Story of King Arthur and His Knights does include information about what the book is and other works by the author. I think it would be beneficial to include other information about the publication of the book as well as how the book differs from other King Arthur literature. The lead section is followed by plot summaries for each of the sections of the book. I need to include additional summary information for each main section to break up the stacked headers. Overall, the organization of the summary information is logical as it follows the organization of the novel. The tone and writing style of each summary could be improved by varying sentence structures and clarifying characters without the excessive use of pronouns. With the information in the summaries, I might be able to create a character list, which would improve the article's adherence to the preferred article structure. The "reception" section has important/useful information that could be brought up to the lead section for a more informative introduction. Jesse R Long (talk) 21:06, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Persuasion
In the Persuasion article, there are a few claims about the novel's creation and influences. For instance, the articles states, "Although the impact of Austen's failing health at the time of writing Persuasion cannot be overlooked, the novel is strikingly original in several ways." I don’t see the connection between Austen's declining health and the quality of originality. Another issue with the final paragraph in the literary criticism section: the last sentence makes a claim about other's considerations of Anne's wants and wishes. This paragraph does not have a citation attached to it to support the claim. Other than this statement, other claims throughout the article are backed by research and connections to relevant literature on the subject.

The Story of King Arthur and His Knights
The majority of the information in the Story of King Arthur and His Knights article is summary information. The only information that is sourced is in the "reception" section of the article. The source for the article's claim is reliable and adds to the purpose of the article. This section could use more information about the repose to Pyle's re-telling of Arthurian legends. Jesse R Long (talk) 22:06, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Persuasion
In the Persuasion article, there are several sentences in the character descriptions and plot summary that could be seen as "un-encyclopedic" in tone. For instance, there are several character descriptions that use numerous adjectives to explain a character or situation where a simple, straightforward sentence would be more effective. I have posted questions on the talk page about editing these sections and how I should go about it. There are a few sections in the literary criticism section that are a bit argumentative in tone. For instance, it is stated that "Susan Morgan in her 1980 book on Austen challenges Litz on naming Persuasion as a novel showing Austen's assimilation of the new romantic poetry, as this raises difficulties" and "Litz acknowledges the crudeness of these formulations and we recognize that he is attempting to discuss a quality of the novel which is hard to describe. But such summaries, even tentatively offered, only distort." Both of these statements imply an argument from the article rather than stating facts.

The Story of King Arthur and His Knights
In the King Arthur article, there were several ambiguous sentences due to the use of pronouns. I went through and edited these for clarity. I also edited for tense consistency throughout the article. As the majority of the information is summary information, I went through and compared the info to another source to make sure it was accurate. The tone was pretty consistent; the article avoided storytelling, rather it gave a neutral summary of the events. Jesse R Long (talk) 00:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC)