Wikipedia:Peer review/The Phantom Tollbooth/archive1

The Phantom Tollbooth
I've listed this article for peer review because… I'm hoping to take this to FAC and would be grateful for feedback.

Thanks, Wehwalt (talk) 13:18, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments from SchroCat
A couple of early tweaks made before the review proper, largely to the refs. I see a problem with FN14: there is no corresponding work from Pullman in the sources. The last three FNs also need looking at, as they are bare urls at the moment. An interesting read, and looking forward to a more thorough review shortly. – SchroCat (talk) 17:09, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm waiting on the arrival of the 50th anniversary edition to which he wrote an introduction, in the post, and I'll fix that then. The other three I will fix. Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:12, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Lead
 * "such as when Milo unintentionally jumps to Conclusions (an island in Wisdom), explore the literal meanings of idioms." Needs fixing (to explore the literal, possibly?)
 * I don't see it. If you take out the clause, it's  "many events explore the literal meanings of idioms".

Writing
 * "In 1958 ... In June 1950. Did anything happen between '58 and '60? Can't we just start with 1960, if nothing had canged? (or why '58 – why not '57?)
 * "Juster quit his job" a bit informal, maybe?
 * I'm inclined to let it stand. I don't think it's as informal in US English.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:10, 21 February 2016 (UTC)


 * "His imagination fired by a boy": was fired?
 * It's an ablative absolute, from what little I recall of such things (I will no doubt be corrected if wrong).--Wehwalt (talk) 10:27, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "At the time, educators advised against children's literature containing words the target audience did not already know, fearing the unfamiliar would discourage young learners.": I can guess why this is here, but you've not told us of the vocabulary used in the book
 * "Feiffer did consider": "Feiffer considered"?

Done to the end of writing. Interesting read and very enjoyable (although I've never heard of the book before). More to follow shortly. – SchroCat (talk) 18:44, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Themes
 * "Milo meets his trials by defining himself as different than the kingdom's inhabitants": is 'different than' an Americanism? I would have thought 'different from, or to' would work better
 * Artifact of a changed mind.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:10, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Influences
 * "Samuel would speak lengthy passages from the movies": "quote passages"?
 * Yes, though I think there's a better way of putting it. Will keep mulling it over.

Reception
 * "As ‘'Pilgrim’s Progress'’ is concerned with the awakening of the sluggardly spirit, ‘'The Phantom Tollbooth’' is ...: I,think the formatting of the two titles has gone astray here as they seem to be a mix of one curly, one straight quote mark. I think italics would be better, and allowable to change the formatting of the quote, if that's the problem.

Final tranche to follow,in the morning. – SchroCat (talk) 23:55, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Later editions
 * "In 2011, The Annotated Phantom Tollbooth which includes sketches and copies of Juster's handwritten drafts and word lists, Feiffer's early drawings, and an introduction and annotations by Leonard S. Marcus." This needs a tweak to make sense. I presume that this was an edition that was published, but that key info is missing from the sentence

Excellent read of something I've never heard of previously. As an ignorant newcomer to the subject I feel quite educated on the subject now! Thanks for the read, and I hope the suggestions above are useful. Please drop me a note when you go to FAC, or if there is anything here that needs clarifying. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 07:56, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that. Where I haven't commented, I've made the change.

Comments from Cassianto

 * Writing
 * "Feiffer was surprised to learn that his friend's insomnia was not caused by the cities book, but by another work." -- Any idea which?
 * Link to Brooklyn for those of us who are alien to America
 * "Juster's guilt over his lack of progress on the cities book led him to write pieces of stories about a little boy named Milo." --"Guilt" is a little to strong here. And do we know his thought process of going from writing about cities to the adventures of a boy?


 * "At the time, educators advised against confronting children in literature with words they did not already know..." -- "confronting" is a little too strong here; suggest "introducing"?
 * "Feiffer did not like to draw maps (Juster wanted a map) or horses." -- could be worded better, I think.
 * Themes
 * I'm struggling with" "Since no one has ever bothered to explain the importance of learning to Milo, he regards school as the biggest waste of time in his life." -- Perhaps a little too negative; suggest: "The importance of learning was never explained to Milo, which caused him to regard school as the biggest waste of time in his life."?
 * I think there's a sense of adult neglect in the book that shouldn't be lost. Ultimately, his parents haven't done their job.


 * "Juster intended that the book speak to the importance of learning to love learning" -- Juster intended that the book speak of the importance of learning
 * No, I don't think it's that, it's the inculcating the desire to learn for its own sake. The difference between doing a painful duty and doing what you do with gusto. To learn what isn't on the final, if that translates transatlantic.


 * Influences and comparisons
 * It would be rude not to link "puns" here, seeing as we do so in the lead.
 * "listening to radio serial" -- listening to a radio serial?
 * Does "Expectations" need to be capitalised?
 * Unless in a quote, "Young readers can learn something from both adventuring children by vicariously watching as Milo and Alice negotiate their trials" does strike me as being POV.
 * I've reworked it some, but I don't see it as very contentious. Kids learn from anything. It's their job.


 * "Milo's quest" -- pronoun here, I think.
 * Publication and reception
 * The intoduction to Dahl's book may lead one to assume that he also wrote The Bronze Bow.
 * Following on from that: "...set in Biblical times, which would bring Elizabeth George Speare her second Newbery Award in three years", I see, is linked to the former point. I'd break after James and the Giant Peach, as the sentence seems to become lost in itself.
 * "Hers was far from the only positive piece" -- Should this have a possessive apostrophe?
 * Not on this side of the Atlantic.


 * Later history, editions and adaptations
 * The Phantom Tollbooth is acknowledged as a classic of children’s literature. By who?
 * Not sure what is meant on the last one. If I didn't respond, I fixed it. Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:12, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley

 * Writing
 * "too many notes and too little written" – your meaning is perfectly clear, but this of all books may attract the attention of literal-minded souls (e.g. me) pointing out that the phrase is self-contradictory. "… too little of the book written" is less elegant than your version but is more precise.
 * "At the time, educators advised …" This could do with a logical link to the next sentence. I habitually bang on about excessive "howevers", but I think we could do with one here.
 * "Sir John Tenniel" – he was a mere Mr when he did the Alice drawings, and on the whole I think I'd omit the Sir here.
 * Themes
 * "….not the reader's, "A slavish …" – not sure about the comma here. Perhaps a colon?
 * Quote-box – perhaps it's just my Anglicised London-published copy, but the text in front of me reads "Lionheart" rather than "Lion Heart", and ''Humbugium" is capitalised.
 * It seems they did alter it for the British edition, as I checked it against my version (the 2011 annotated). I suppose Milo violates by-laws rather than ordinances in the Doldrums.

That's all from me. I am deep in your debt for introducing me to this enchanting book, and I think you have done it full justice in the article. You'll ping me when FAC looms, I trust. –  Tim riley  talk    11:49, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Influences and comparisons
 * "his father Samuel would speak lengthy passages" – we've met his father earlier, but this is the first mention of his name: perhaps it would be better in the previous paragraph, where the father first appears.
 * Publication and reception
 * A trivial point, but why include the "magazine" in the piping of The New Yorker?
 * Later history, editions and adaptations
 * "read her copy so often it fell apart, "it didn't occur to us…" – another comma that might be better as a colon, perhaps.
 * I have seen reference to a musical version (I'm guessing it is the one referred to here and citation is to hand if wanted) with music by Arnold Black, book by Juster and Sheldon Harnick, and lyrics by Harnick. I know not of Black, but even a benighted Brit has heard of Harnick, and I wonder if it might be worth mentioning them in the article?
 * Final block-quote: the MoS allows, and indeed I think encourages, us to rationalise punctuation within quotations, which being so I'd lose the spaces on either side of the em-dash.
 * I shall. Thank you most kindly for your comments.  I'm glad you enjoyed the book.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:28, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments from BB
Delightful article. My usual list of suggestions, nitpicks and gripes. A few prose points need looking at.
 * Lead
 * "rave reviews" is a journalistic cliché which I believe could be expressed more elegantly
 * Plot
 * For a not especially long book I feel the plot summary is maybe a trifle long, at 935 words. I'm not suggesting radical surgery, but could it not be trimmed slightly?
 * Trimmed slightly. It's just the setup takes time to describe, and I feel obliged to have mentioned the characters who appear in the more analytical sections.


 * "endpaper" is one, not two words (acc. to dictionary & our linked article)
 * (first para): maybe "manifestly" rather than "evidently" – the latter seems a little weak?
 * Why the quote marks around "watchdog"? Is Tock an actual dog? You refer later to "boy, dog and insect", but I'm still uncertain.
 * He is illustrated on the front cover at the start of things. I've played with it slightly but I think there's an extent to which we will have to rely on that.


 * The sentence/para that begins "Along the way..." does not seem quite correct, syntactically, and I have difficulty understanding it in its present form.
 * I've split the sentence. I'd prefer to retain the phrasing re Chroma as he does lose time, a week's worth.


 * "Milo maneuvers him [the Mathemagician] into saying he will let them go..." – you have not said that he was detaining them.
 * "three intrepid journeyers": adjective is borderline editorial
 * Writing
 * Something amiss with this sentence: "Feiffer considers the double-spread illustration of demons late in the book to be a success and one of his favorites, being different from his usual style (which would involve a white background), instead using Gustave Doré's drawings as an inspiration". I suggest a split thus: "Feiffer considers the double-spread illustration of demons late in the book to be a success and one of his favorites. It differs from his usual style (which would involve a white background), and instead uses Gustave Doré's drawings as an inspiration".
 * "Milo's age was altered..." Not altered, eradicated.
 * Themes
 * "A slavish concern for the composition of words is the sign of a bankrupt intellect." Whose words?
 * I think it's clear enough that it's the Humbug. I played with altering it but feel this will do.


 * "Through Milo's trip through..." Can we avoid the repetition?
 * "previously-bored" should not be hyphenated (per "Rule 3" here which I vaguely remember from school)
 * "According to Liston" soon followed by "According to Mary Liston"
 * Influences and comparisons
 * "end paper" again
 * "going so far as" is again one of those commonplace expressions which is in my view too opinionated for encyclopedic use.
 * Re Tock again: "...the character of Tock, based on sidekick Jim Fairfield from Jack Armstrong, the All-American Boy." This is a dog?
 * The wise companion is a staple of literature, Virgil to Dante for example. In this case he's in canine form.  Presumably Carroll got the March Hare from somewhere.


 * Publication and reception
 * "Neither publisher nor first-time author expected many sales..." clarify that we're back on The Phantom Tollbooth, as you've just mentioned two other books.
 * "rhapsodic" should be in quotes if it's Juster's word. If it's editorial comment it should be substituted
 * Close the Maxwell quotation
 * General point: after the first para, at least two-thirds of the text id direct quotation from reviewers, I believe that is too much, and recommend a modicum of paraphrase.
 * I've paraphrased one.


 * Later history, editions and adaptations
 * Rave reviews again
 * "In 2011, The Annotated Phantom Tollbooth which includes sketches and copies of Juster's handwritten drafts and word lists, Feiffer's early drawings, and an introduction and annotations by Leonard S. Marcus." This is not a complete sentence.
 * "It has been adapted into a small-scale opera with music by Arnold Black, and book by Juster and Sheldon Harnick was produced by OperaDelaware in 1995." Grammar shot somewhere
 * Why "OperaDelaware" not "Opera Delaware" as per the linked article?
 * Thank you, I think I've caught them all.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Excellent choice. Brianboulton (talk) 00:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and to all the peer reviewers. I'm going to close this to bring on weightier fare.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)