Wikipedia:Peer review/Allah jang Palsoe/archive1

Allah jang Palsoe
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to bring it to FAC and would like some feedback from persons unfamiliar with the subject.

Thanks, — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:58, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments from SchroCat
There are one or two places where you refer to Kwee, and others when you refer to Kwee Tek Hoay; I'd standardise on the full name, given you have John Kwee also mentioned (if he's referred to more than once I'd use "John Kwee" throughout too).
 * Lead
 * "by ethnic-Chinese writer": the usual question of which variant of English you're using in this article. If BrEng it should be "by the ethnic-Chinese writer"; others are obviously different. The same point occurs in other places too ("by journalist", etc);
 * "the play, though deemed a difficult one": is that a difficult one to stage? I think you could clarify with that addition;


 * Analysis
 * "shows individuals doing anything, even sacrificing their values, to earn it": could be "shows individuals doing anything to earn it, even sacrificing their values."

An interesting article. The plot could probably do with a couple of tweaks to tighten it and I'll have another look at that in a day or so. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 14:33, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Done those three comments. I've actually trimmed the plot back a bit from what was there originally. The six paragraph structure is deliberate: it marks what each act focuses on. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:25, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

 * Seems well done, just a few quibbles
 * "Other readings of the play have shown a Chinese nationalist identity and depiction of negative traits in women." a bit awkward, maybe "Some interpretations of the play are that it has a Chinese nationalist theme and that it shows negative traits in women." something like that
 * Alternate wording provided: nobody cited denies the main "money" issue.
 * "was a loss" lost money?
 * Right. The inclusion of "commercial" in the previous clause, I think, makes it clear.
 * "though deemed a difficult one" I think you have to add "to act" following this ("perform" would be better, but you're already using it)
 * Used Schro's wording above ("to stage")
 * " and based on E. Phillips Oppenheim's short story" I think you should throw a "was" in there
 * Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "that such an issue would have been common among ethnic Chinese" maybe "that such a message would have been popular among ethnic Chinese"
 * Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "He writes that such conditions are common even in the best of times" maybe "He writes that such is life even in the best of times"
 * Like it. Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * " promote an apologetic attitude towards" maybe "be an apologist for"
 * Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "finding both of them to be similar" strike "both of", not needed.
 * Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "Although initially criticised for lack of interesting costumes, instead emphasising everyday clothing, the play was well received" I think that the order in this sentence should be reversed, as you just wait too long to find out what it is all about.
 * Done. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * " though any proceeds" I'd expect "proceeds" to mean the total gate revenues, which is surely not the case. Maybe "with royalties payable to the (branch)"
 * Not done. The source says "The play could be put on the stage provided the entire proceeds were donated to T.H.H.K. in Bogor." — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * what is a charity opera?
 * Will pull out Sumardjo again to cite it. Essentially, they were moralistic plays performed by social organizations (mostly ethnic Chinese) to raise funds for charity. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "morally didactic" I might change the word didactic for well, anything else.
 * Reworked. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Ref 4 needs an italics
 * That's it, good work as usual. It's a pleasure to read about something that has been seen since 1952.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:03, 11 January 2016 (UTC)