Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Indian Camp/archive1

TCO comments
Just gave it a pretty quick skim. Seems like an important topic and an engaging one, given the live/die starkness. Kudos for doing it. Seems like you hit the major areas. Really did not give it a strong read, so can't support or oppose. Few suggestions:

1. Feels like you overlink a bit for words that are mildly "fancy" but are not really important concepts to the article nor proper nouns. "Canon", "autobiographical" (linked to autobiography, not to a theory of literature), "lietmotif". Something like icerberg theory on the other hand deserves its link. Something like "canon", I would either just use (and not link) or cut and say "of Hemingway".

2. Caesarian capitalized or not?

TCO (talk) 20:36, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I would certainly link to canon and lietmotif. The other two now fixed. Ceoil  21:09, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Canon is always linked in regard to Hemingway because there is a Hemingway canon and not everyone knows what that means. Leitmotif is important regarding the Nick Adams stories, of which this is the first, and quite honestly, for students who may be reading this, the concept of an autobiographical piece is also important in a literary sense. I doubt that caeasarian is capitalized, but I'll look it up. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:27, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * TCO, Just out of curiousity, and not that I mind, but why are you posting here, and not the review page? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Because they are initial cmts, and s/he didnt want to weigh in with eyes on her/him. I can understand that. Ceoil  21:44, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * On Caesarian, you had it capitalized in one spot, but then not in another. Not sure which is right, but pick one...TCO (talk) 22:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Getting there. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:23, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * According the dictionary either capitalized or not. Now not capitalized throughout. I think Ceoil got the others you mentioned. I've left autobiography unlinked but wonder whether it should be for the high school kids who read this page. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:09, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Surely caesarian in this context is not a proper noun. I doubt anybody who has made it to the article will be wondering what an autobiography is, though its such a small thing and hardly a deal breaker. Ceoil  23:18, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with Ceoil.TCO (talk) 23:26, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'm fine with that. I think all your comments have been addressed. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:28, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No sweat man, you did not need to deal with me anyhow. Have not really reviewed it.  You are buddies with the high and powerful.  I need to exert my energies protecting young airplane editors from the hatchet. ;)  TCO (talk) 23:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Its not like that TCO, all input is valued and taken on board here, some are more shrill in giving thanks (TK is fine), but don't let others turn you off if you have something to say. And its ok to say...'from a brief scan'. Ceoil  00:26, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's just that I almost didn't see it and wondered why it was here. Not a big deal at all, and I always welcome comments, the more eyes the better as far as I'm concerned. I've a had bit of a bad day, and am a little discombobulated. That's all. Oh, and by the way, thanks.  Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:38, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * My mistake, he was a tool after all. Giving this aggressive trolling . A sock of some sort? Ceoil  01:05, 24 June 2011 (UTC)