Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Giver/archive2

The Giver
I am resubmitting this as a FAC in the belief that recent work by User:Anville has addressed significantly the previous objections in the previously unsuccessful FAC in February of this year. That is, I feel it does an adequate job explaining how it is culturally and historically relevant now as well as explaining the many honors it has gained from the literary community, which were both objections. That, coupled with it being an interesting article and well written, leads me to conclude that it ought to be proposed to the community as a featured article. For full disclosure, I worked very minorly on this article, but not really enough to seriously claim that this is a self-nom. In any case, I'll be interested to read community comments in the hopes that this will be a FA soon. -SocratesJedi | Talk 05:38, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Support While I've worked on this article too much to be able to give a fully impartial vote, I do think that it adequately addresses the objections raised during its previous FAC cycle. (I hasten to add that I believe those objections were perfectly valid ones, and I'm glad that several users took the time to formulate them well.)  Full disclosure: my problem right now is about keeping the article NPOV.  While I believe I did this in a technical way, anchoring everything with lots of citations, I personally find that many "sources" advocating the censorship of this book read like what The Onion ' s staff writers would put into the mouth of a reactionary school board.  They really do read like something a satirist would invent!  In these cases, it makes me feel like the prosecution is pleading the case of the defense. . . . Anville 14:48, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I think it reads too much like a book review, and too little like an encyclopedia article. In the end, however, someone hoping to find out what the book is will be informed by the article--which is the basic function of a wikipedia article.  I don't think it at all represents the best of the Wikipedia, but since my objections hold true for the bulk of Wikipedia articles on books, I'm not going to stand in the way of this article's opportunity for featured status.  I do wish, however, that colorful (and POV) phrases like "written in simple yet evocative language" or "fans of The Giver are no doubt gratified that Lois Lowry went beyond the place she was tempted to stop; those who have attempted to ban the book from schools are probably less pleased" could be left out.  They have no place in the article.