Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Quicksilver (novel)/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 19:38, 8 April 2010.

Quicksilver (novel)

 * Nominator(s): Sadads (talk) 23:03, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I feel that this article, which I have been working on for a long time and got it up to GA status without any objection, and feel that it is one of the best examples of contemporary historical fiction and this article covers the scope of literary criticism on it. I wish to pursue the expansion of other parts of the Baroque Cycle and want to get the whole series up for a featured category nomination. It is my first nomination of this sort, but it is about time, I have been on WP:Novels for quite some time.Sadads (talk) 23:03, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments. No dab links or dead external links. Ucucha 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't really understand the need for File:NealStephenson_Quicksilver.jpg, could this be clarified Fasach Nua (talk) 23:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Its the first edition cover (most historically significant), per WikiProject_Novels/Style_guidelines, Sadads (talk) 23:47, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that is a truly bazaar guideline, however I was thinking in terms of wp:nfcc criteria 8 Fasach Nua (talk) 04:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Its like a portrait picture of a person, it is the best way to identify the individual subject visually. It is also relevant to the publication, like movie posters. Sadads (talk) 04:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose - invalid use of non-free content Fasach Nua (talk) 04:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Wait a minute See #1 at Non-free_content. It clearly is a valid use, per rational in last comment as well (use for identification of object being critically discussed). Sadads (talk) 04:44, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Does the article discuss the cover itself in detail, as opposed to the contents of the book? If not, I can't see much justification to have the image. Ucucha 12:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, per the recommendations of both policy at Non-free_content and WikiProject_Novels/Style_guidelines, discussion of the cover itself need not be the focus, but instead discussion of what it represents (thus discussion of the Novel itself warrants it's most historically relevant cover). This has not been a problem for other FAs, all the modern literature under Featured_articles has cover images and all the movies under Featured_articles have movie production posters. This is a non-issue. If you have problems with this policy, address it at a more community level discussion, not here. Sadads (talk) 15:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments: This should have gone through a Peer Review and copy-edit before coming directly to FAC, especially since this is a first nomination on your part, Sadads. The writing is poor and confusing in places; I'm not familiar with the novel, but I almost gave up halfway through the lead.  A few examples from the top:
 * It is the first volume of his The Baroque Cycle, a historical fiction series, succeeded by The Confusion and The System of the World (both 2004) -- "both 2004" what?
 * Quicksilver is a volume split into three books in 2006 in order to make the 900 pages more approachable by readers -- "in 2006" what? It was split?  Because the paragraph before says it was (initially?) published in 2003.
 * Quicksilver is written in various narrative styles including drama and letter series and follows a large group of characters. -- "drama and letter series" sounds inexact and nonliterary. A novel written in letters is epistolary, is that what is meant?
 * Throughout the novel many historical events such as the Great Plague of London, the Great Fire of London, the Edict of Fontainebleau, the Monmouth Rebellion, the Bloody Assizes, the Battle of Vienna and the Glorious Revolution, though many details, such as each member of what he calls the CABAL, have been changed. -- "[M]any historical events... though many details... have been changed." Huh? See what's missing here?
 * "The plot of the first and third books focus on Daniel Waterhouse and his exploits as a young Natural Philosopher and friend to Isaac Newton and his observations of English politics and religion." -- and and and and.

I haven't gone beyond the lead at this point, but I obviously have doubts about the state of the rest of the article. I won't oppose at this point, but until a thorough copy-edit is done (preferably by more than one editor), this article does not fulfill the FA criteria. María ( habla con migo ) 12:38, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I will fix those, previous reviewers and the reviewers for GA did not find any issues (I asked for additional input from multiple editors, and all give me a thumbs up) and I have been going back and cleaning up, so I thought it was relatively clear. But thank you for the direct input, working on a fix. Sadads (talk) 14:55, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Any other points of clarification you notice please point out. I love advice and help. Sadads (talk) 15:23, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid you're not done. I suggested you find someone else to copy-edit, and it's still necessary, as several of my points were not adequately addressed.  Sometimes editors become too close to their writing and cannot see the glaring mistakes that exist in plain sight; that's where a non-involved editor comes in handy.
 * Quicksilver is a volume split into three books in 2006 in order to make the 900 pages more approachable by readers. -- The "in 2006" is still thrown in there, confusing the prior fact that the book was initially published three years earlier. "In 2006, Quicksilver was split into three books in order to make the initial 900-page volume..." etc.  Much clearer, yes?
 * Quicksilver is written in various narrative styles, such as theatrical staging and epistolary, and follows a large group of characters. -- "theatrical staging" is not a narrative style, and such wording directly conflicts with "epistolary". Rather, the novel uses theatrical staging and is (at times?) epistolary.  However this may be reworded (which is must be), depends on the rest of the sentence, which probably needs reworked no matter what.
 * This sentence: "Throughout the novel many historical events such as the Great Plague of London, the Great Fire of London, the Edict of Fontainebleau, the Monmouth Rebellion, the Bloody Assizes, the Battle of Vienna and the Glorious Revolution, details, such as the members of the CABAL, have been changed" continues to make no sense. If I was not clear above, I apologize.  "Throughout the novel many historical events" what?  The thought is not finished.  Many historical events such as blah blah blah... are detailed?  Are represented?  What?
 * I shouldn't be seeing these issues in the lead section, as these concerns should have been addressed at an earlier stage; FAC is not a Peer Review, nor should it be treated as one. I don't have the time to go sentence-by-sentence, but there are issues throughout.  A couple sentences down I see "He had also had heard considerable discussion" and this headache: "Because he was both doing extensively historical researching historical events and the development of developing a myriad of characters, he gained a considerable number of notebooks along with and several piles of stationary upon which he composed the novels upon ."  Or something.  I'm not a master wordsmith, which is why I find that I need numerous expert eyes looking over my shoulder before I find the confidence to nominate at FAC, but you get my drift.  This article needs help.  FAC is serious business.  Until things improve, I will have to Oppose. María ( habla  con migo ) 15:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Addressing copy edit concerns: I have contacted several editors (new and old to the article page), asking for some support. Hope it will be timely, will address above issues of María's and continue my own reviewing of it. Sadads (talk) 19:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose: On the issue of the lead image I agree with you. However, on the prose question I agree absolutely with Maria; this article needs some thorough attention, and here at FAC is not the appropriate place for this. Just a few examples of prose problems in the lead, apart from those raised by Maria:-
 * Second sentence: "It is the first volume of his The Baroque Cycle, a historical fiction series, succeeded by The Confusion and The System of the World (both published in 2004)." This reads confusingly; "succeeded" is not the best word either. The sentence would be clearer as "It is the first volume of his historical fiction series The Baroque Cycle, and is followed by The Confusion and The System of the World (both published in 2004)."
 * Second paragraph, first sentence: apart from the confusion mentioned by Maria, we have "in order", a form much deprecated in featured prose. "Approachable by" might be better as "accessible to" (but that's a personal preference).
 * Next sentence: "These books were originally sections of the greater cycle during composition." It took me a while to work this out; is this significant information? Why does the reader need to know this?
 * Why is "books" in quotes, and isn't something missing from "...set in the late 17th mostly in England..."?
 * "a vagabond and former member of the Turkish harem" - should be "...and a former member..." Also, the Turkish harem" - was there only one?
 * "landing in the Netherlands"? Not the best phrasing; perhaps "reaching the Netherlands"?

With so many errors or questionable phrases so early, it is clear that the article does not meet featured criterion 1(a). There is no doubt much good stuff in it, but time needs to be spent by one or more uninvolved editors with FA experience, to bring the prose to standard. I don't believe this can be done in the structure and timescale of FAC and would recommend a peer review. Brianboulton (talk) 20:49, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.