Wikipedia:Peer review/Journey Through the Impossible/archive1

Journey Through the Impossible
This peer review discussion has been closed. I'd love to bring this quirky science fantasy to FA, and I'm not sure what edits are needed to get the article to that level of quality. Any and all suggestions will be much appreciated.

Thanks, Lemuellio (talk) 15:06, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO

 * Lead
 * Looks good
 * Plot
 * I guess it's okay to not cite plot material, but it seems odd to allow what amounts to WP:OR.


 * Some years before the play begins
 * This might be a little informal. Would "Several years" convey the same thing?


 * Dr. Ox is a sinister Tempter figure
 * Should "tempter" be capped?


 * The doctor, catching Georges alone, reveals Georges's true parentage
 * How about, "The doctor, catching him alone, reveals Georges' true parentage"?


 * and persuades him to drink a magic potion which allows him to go beyond the limits of the probable and journey through the impossible. 
 * I'd replace "which" with "that", since it's more of a restrictive clause.


 * Themes
 * However, the plot of the play sets it distinctly apart 
 * "However" is rarely helpful, so avoid it whenever possible.


 * the plot of the play sets it distinctly apart from the rest of Verne's work: where his novels are based on meticulously researched facts and plausible conjectures
 * I think that colon ought to be a comma.


 * celebrating it for its humanistic achievements and discoveries but also warning that it can do immense harm
 * You need a comma to preceded "but" here.


 * the play can be considered Verne's most purely science-fictional work
 * "Can be" considered seems a bit vague and/or passive.


 * The play, by exploring science in both positive and negative lights, has been said to show Verne in transition
 * As with above, this seems unnecessarily passive.


 * Production
 * but under the terms of the contract Verne's profits barely earned him a living.
 * The profits don't really "earn you a living". They enable a living, but this could be better.


 * Verne's stage adaptation of his novel Around the World in Eighty Days, however, was a smash hit in 1874,
 * Another "however" that could be dropped.


 * almost overnight
 * There's no such thing as an overnight success, so maybe drop this idiomatic expression that reads a bit cliché, especially surrounded by what is otherwise excellent prose.


 * However, a novel featuring a similar trip around 
 * Another


 * According to the féerie historian Paul Ginisty,
 * This attribution might not be necessary.


 * The music was by Oscar de Lagoanère, a prolific composer and music director.
 * I'd rewrite this in an active voice, but IO can see why you might want "music", not de Lagoanère as the subject of the sentence.


 * Reception
 * The Parisian critic Arnold Mortier, in a long review of the play, found it "very beautiful and very elegant"
 * Instead of the longer quote here, it might be better as: "The Parisian critic Arnold Mortier, in a long review of the play, described it as "beautiful" and "elegant", since those "verys" add little.


 * Nice critical balance in this section, BTW.
 * Rediscovery
 * However, it remains relatively little-known among his works
 * Try to minimize use of "however" in the article. I think a few are okay, but there are several that ought to be reconsidered.

The first thing that strikes me is how well-written this article is. The prose is overall quite excellent. The second thing is the neutrality and balance, and views of the work seem to have been given a comprehensive treatment. This is a great article. I love Verne (who doesn't), but even those who are less familiar with his work will find this to be enjoyable reading. Nicely done! Please let me know when you take this to FAC, as I'd love to have another look. RO (talk) 21:04, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Conclusion
 * Thanks so much! All of these are good points. I'll get to work on the article.--Lemuellio (talk) 23:53, 15 August 2015 (UTC)