Wikipedia:Peer review/Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Hard Luck/archive1

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Hard Luck
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to nominate it to be a good article. This is the third article I've done a plot summary for, and I feel that I've done really well for that part. I have found reliable sources and balanced out real world coverage. I would like to see if other people like this article as well.

Thanks, Scrooge200 (talk) 07:40, 15 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Looks like a good work there, however, I would say it looks slightly underlinked. I found good coverage in the plot section, but found no sources. I will welcome new opinions to the review. See you I will, I know the best wiki (talk) 08:09, 20 March 2019 (UTC).
 * I agree that there could be more links, but I can't find any places to put them without them being generic subjects. I found a review in a magazine that covered a bit of the plot, so I sourced that for the parts it covered. I don't think I really need any plot sources, though, as it's pretty easy to figure out that all the plot comes from the book itself. Thank you for your review. Scrooge200 (talk) 23:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Comment by Valereee


 * Hi, ! I'd like to see the citations in the lede (which are for noncontroversial assertions) moved out of the lede and to the appropriate places in the sections. This is purely personal preference, but for simple purposes of readability of the lede, I like to see only those assertions that really need to be cited every time they appear receive a citation in the lede.


 * As an additional point, one reason I like to do this myself when I write an article (move citations to sections if possible) is because it forces me to make sure that everything in the lead is also within the sections, and in fact I'm not sure I do see the exact assertions in the final sentence of the lede mentioned in the sections?
 * I have moved the citations and information.


 * The book's existence was announced seems an odd construction. From the info in the section it seems like it was announced as an upcoming book at the end of the previous book, so it didn't actually "exist"? I think I'd recast this sentence.
 * I double checked, and The Third Wheel just has a vague "Coming Soon: More Diary of a Wimpy Kid" after it lists all the books on the title page. This confirms nearly nothing (it doesn't specify if it's even a book, let alone another main-series one), and most of the other books, including Hard Luck itself, have that as well. I removed it.


 * The plot section feels like it could use some copyediting and tightening. "The book starts with Greg writing about how his mother is always saying" is awkward.
 * I decided to replace it with the firect quote.
 * friends will come and go but family is forever." Greg doesn't believe that, since his friend, Rowley, now has a girlfriend named Abigail, continuing from the events of the last book. Ever since then, Rowley has been acting different, such as refusing to hang out with Greg and agreeing with everything Abigail says. This seems contradictory -- doesn't it prove his mother is right? But you're writing that he doesn't believe friends come and go because Rowley has changed?
 * Yeah, I think I was a little confused while writing this. The line detailing it is "I think Mom is just trying to make me feel better about my situation with Rowley anyway. Rowley's been my best friend ever since he moved into my neighborhood, but things have really changed between us lately." I have fixed it.
 * the family notices through a photo album is awkward, not sure what it means.
 * While looking through a photo album, they notice that Meemaw is wearing her ring in one photo, but not in the one depicting her putting things in the eggs. Is there a more concise way to explain this?
 * Why would finding Meemaw's ring break up the family? How does hiding it in his mother's closet solve that?
 * The ring is worth a lot of money, and Greg's family fights over who should get it if they do find it. The part about his mother's closet connects to a bit of filler about Greg going through and reading books from the closet. I decided to cut that part out because the plot was getting pretty long and I felt like I didn't need it. He just hides it somewhere he knows nobody will look for it, and the quote wouldn't make sense without the accompanying illustration.
 * Final two paragraphs of Plot do not have a citation, that could cause a problem at GA.
 * It's pretty hard to find sources on the ending of a book. Isn't it logical enough to assume that the plot comes from the book itself?


 * Development section also needs copyediting/tightening. Teaser artwork for the then-unnamed book was released in March 2013, which depicted seems to be saying March 13 is what depicted the central character.


 * Reception: I think the various publications need to be italicized?
 * Booklist does, according to its page, but Common Sense Media is not.


 * Honors: I'm not sure you can call sales figures 'honors'?
 * I copied this from the Double Down page, which listed sales under "awards and honors." Hard Luck hasn't


 * I did not check any references to ensure they support the assertions they're being used to support, is that help you feel you need or are you pretty confident with that?
 * I think I'm good with this. Thank you for offering.
 * Hope these are helpful! --valereee (talk) 16:17, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reviewing this article! Scrooge200 (talk) 05:54, 15 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Happy to help! Re: your question about concise vs. overlong plot summary, yeah, that's always a problem for these sections! Re: plot ending info not covered in sources so coming from the book itself: that can be fine, per MOS:PLOTSOURCE. A GA reviewer might argue with it. A DYK reviewer would likely insist on a citation, as that's one of the rules for DYK (all paragraphs must have at least one) but you might be able to get around that by just combing the final three paragraphs into one. Re: copied from the Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Double Down page: lol, never say "copied" to someone reviewing your work on WP! You "used the same section headings" as the ones from that article. :) I suspect the section head on that page was chosen for a similar reason: many articles about books have such a section. But this section (and the one on that page) is about sales figures, not honors. --valereee (talk) 11:59, 15 May 2019 (UTC)