Talk:Berge Meere und Giganten

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Berge Meere und Giganten has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
February 17, 2012 Good article nominee Listed
March 16, 2012 Peer review Reviewed
Current status: Good article

To-do list[edit]

  • Add plot summary  Done
  • Add to genesis: where he wrote it, what the original inspiration was, the personal breakdown/crisis after finishing it (also the personal issues w/ Erna vs. Niclas) (see Schoeller)  Done
  • Sort out, tidy up reception and themes section
    • on second thought, it seems good like it is. Done
  • (feel free, anyone who happens by and knows the novel, to add to the list)

Sindinero (talk) 11:43, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Berge Meere und Giganten/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 11:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    I have never read any books by Döblin, but would like some day :)
    He's great, and there's always something new to find. Sindinero (talk) 08:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
    Lead should be larger. For example, the section "Genesis and publication" is not summarized in the lead--♫GoP♫TCN 19:43, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
     Done Sindinero (talk) 08:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
    Will continue later
    I pretty much enjoyed the prose. Imagine one will read from top to bottom, and then discovers that there is no English translation available to date :P.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Use a consistent style, eg " 790-792" and then "155-7" (you should use the first version, as the latter is misleading)
     Done Sindinero (talk) 08:11, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall: Great article!

To-do list before FAC[edit]

  • Expand "Critical reception" section with contemporary and current material.
  • Expand "Thematic and stylistic aspects" section, including more sources.
  • Expand lead.

Sindinero (talk) 14:09, 19 June 2013 (UTC)