Wikipedia:Peer review/The Ladies of Grace Adieu and Other Stories/archive1

The Ladies of Grace Adieu and Other Stories

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I would like to nominate this article for GA, so please review accordingly. Thanks. Awadewit (talk) 02:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Nothing better than unsolicited peer reviews, eh? :) Formatting and refs seem in order.  Some comments/suggestions on the prose with GA in mind:
 * Comments from Maria
 * I had to go all the way to the "Reception" section to find when this book was published (October 2006). Since there's not an infobox, it should definitely be mentioned in the lead.
 * Added. Awadewit (talk) 06:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Could there be a better way to describe the nature of these stories/fairy tales in the lead? The two terms are not necessarily synonymous, at least to me, and although the next section mentions dark arts/magic, which definitely points to fantastical elements, this is not explored in the lead.  Perhaps a little more explanation is needed to better summarize the work?
 * New version: The stories, which are sophisticated fairy tales, focus on the power of women; some are set in the same alternate history as Clarke's debut novel Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell (2004), in which magic has returned to England. Awadewit (talk) 06:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * "nearly every one of them is told in a lucid, frequently deadpan, bedtime-story voice strikingly similar to the voice that narrates the novel." Where is this quote from? It seems random without a source named.
 * I don't think this is controversial enough to attribute in the text - I'll figure out a way to paraphrase it, so that the quote isn't necessary. I'll probably need a day or so on this. Awadewit (talk) 06:51, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Paraphrased. Awadewit (talk) 02:34, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Victoria Hoyle in Strange Horizons writes in particular that... Even though this is an online magazine, shouldn't the title be in italics?
 * Yes it should - fixed. Awadewit (talk) 06:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * "People find her spinning on her bleeding bare feet in churchyards after dark missing a comma after "bleeding"?
 * Added. Awadewit (talk) 06:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * This Lady of Shalott figure is weaving his life. He unweaves her tapestry and sews his own future. These two sentences do not flow as well as they could from the quote that proceeds it, and doesn't entirely explain why the Duke chose to weave his own fate; perhaps something like: "Distressed/Angered/Saddened by what he sees in the Lady of Shallot's tapestry, he destroys her work and sews his own future"?
 * New version: Frustrated by the seeming inevitability of his fate, he unweaves her tapestry and resews his own future to match his desires. Awadewit (talk) 06:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * In his review of collection, Steven H. Silver writes that... "the collection".
 * Added. Awadewit (talk) 06:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Vess's black-and-white line drawings are... The only time Vess is mentioned in this article before this point is the lead (and a brief mention connected to Gaiman). His full name should certainly be mentioned here, but is information available as to how he became involved with the project?  Through Gaiman?  (BTW, I haven't read this collection, or even Jonathan Strange, but I love Stardust!)
 * I don't know how he became involved, although it certainly seems likely that the Gaiman connection was involved! (I love Stardust, too!) Awadewit (talk) 06:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Karen Luscombe of The Globe and Mail called the collection "mesmerizing".[3] She praises the tone of the collection... Tense disagreement with "called" and "praises"; all other critics are quoted in present tense, so perhaps "called" should be changed to "calls".
 * I put them all in the past tense. Awadewit (talk) 06:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Hope this helps; I think it will pass GA with no problems. Sounds like an interesting work! Reminds me that I really should settle down one day and read Jonathan Strange... as if I don't have enough on my reading list, gah. María ( habla con migo ) 01:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you - I hope to get to this tomorrow! Jonathan Strange makes a great summer read! :) Awadewit (talk) 05:45, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment from Ricardiana

Hi, Awadewit - the only criticism I could possibly make after reading the article has to do with the longer quotations. There are several that last for 4 or more lines (on my screen resolution at least), and I would find them easier to read if they were put in blockquotes. (My eyesight is very poor, however, so perhaps it's just me.) What do you think? Ricardiana (talk) 06:06, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I've paraphrased some more of the quotes and put some of the longer ones in block quotes. Awadewit (talk) 03:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks great, thank you. Ricardiana (talk) 04:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)