Wikipedia:Peer review/The Sword of Shannara/archive2

The Sword of Shannara

 * Previous peer review
 * 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 September 2008.
 * 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 September 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I want to take it to FAC a third time and make it the charm... =D

Cheers!  -talk- the_ed  17  -contribs-  03:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Based on this version
 * Comments by Jappalang

Plot summary
 * The entire section is broken down into too many sub-sections that are short one-two paragraphs each. The key concern should be just how much details are these necessary to understand the general gist of the story.  Do a general reader need to know the exact time frames the events occur in?  Do they really need to know about Allonan's gift of three blue stones (which never gets mentioned anywhere else) to Shea?  Concentrate on the major events.
 * Have you ever read Sword? There are a lot of, well, 'weird' things that need to be known if you are to understand.
 * The 'History' subsections are now gone.
 * The 'History' section is there so that the reader understand just how much of a "nuisance" the Warlock Lord had been for a long time. It also shows why the Sword of Shannara was forged in the first place. &mdash; the _ ed  17  &mdash; 05:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Consider this. If a person who did not read the book considers the story section of this article long-drawn, then what does that say?  Wikipedia is to serve the general reader, not those with an intense interest in the back story of Shannara.  The events mentioned in this article should be the key points of the story.  Telling us Allanon gave blue stones to Shea is not crucial at all, since no where in the whole article was it mentioned why these stones are important elements of the story.  Jappalang (talk) 04:58, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Characters
 * I find this to be an indiscriminate list of characters. It is simply a list, much of it based on and presented as in-universe information.  There are several characters (especially the minor ones) who are throw-aways: they do not show up anywhere else in the article except in this section.  Thus, they come across as a "This is Joe. He gave the prince a lollipop." kind of statement.  Be discriminate&mdash;take out the throw-away characters and leave the ones who played major roles in the story or have real-life coverage.  Rewrite the list into prose.  You can try putting them as paragraphs separated into factions or by chronology.

General
 * There are too many full quotes. Wikipedia is not a quote farm.  I should not be reading ten sentences of Brooks' or MacRae's own words here if I could read it in their original articles.  Analyze what they are saying and rewrite them into the prose.  You can retain sentences or phrases that could not be rephrased without losing the essence of its meaning or flavor.


 * The layout suffers when the quotes are mixed in with the text without clear marks of delineation (even the big curly quotes do not help on a wide 1600 screen, it can be hard to differentiate the main text from the quote in "Similarities between Sword and The Lord of the Rings").

Sources
 * IMDb is not a reliable source
 * What?!? =( Why not? &mdash; the _ ed  17  &mdash; 05:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * IMDb functions like Wikipedia. Anyone can alter their database.  As such, without editorial control, it is not reliable.  Jappalang (talk) 04:58, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * http://www.alitheia.org/shannarafiles/index2.php
 * I too am not convinced of the reliability of this site. Its listing on the author's site as a fansite is not the same as the author personally stating, "This site accurately restates the events happening in my books. Oh hey, go read my interview there as well."


 * I removed the ref. &mdash; the _ ed  17  &mdash; 05:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Images
 * Image:Allanon and Flick.jpg
 * I am not convinced of the fair-use rationale behind this image. The image does not convey the atmosphere of their meeting, if the event was notable at all. Neither does it show the faces of the two characters clearly, I see only two cloaked shadowy figures.  As far as I can tell, Andy Simmons is not the official artist for the Shanarra series, and his representation would be his own opinion of what the characters look like.  Is he notable in the fantasy art field as to have an influence or impact on how the art of Shanarra is recognized?


 * As stated on his page, he has the permission of Terry Brooks to do these; if they weren't accurate, he wouldn't be allowed to make them, right? Also, the only 'official' artwork was done by the Brothers Hildebrandt for (I believe) only the first edition books...meaning that someone who actually has a 1977 1st edition book (not me) who has access to a good scanner (not me) must do it...and when I'm the only significant contributor to Sword who is still here...=/ &mdash; the _ ed  17  &mdash; 05:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This is on the same principle as the fansite. Receiving permission to paint pictures of an author's characters is not the same as the author saying "Now this is what I pictured Allanon and Shea as!"  Unless Brooks expressly states that Simmons' portrayals are accurate, Simmons' art remains fan-art and not the official portrayals.  The characters of the book are already represented by Image:Shannara quest party.jpg and need no more additional images for their illustration.  Jappalang (talk) 04:58, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I skipped going into details on the lead and Background (but the quote comments still apply to Background) as I believe the above are the main reasons for the articles failure at FAC. Jappalang (talk) 09:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)