Talk:Catching Fire

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Catching Fire 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.
February 22, 2013 Good article nominee Listed
WikiProject Novels / Sci-fi (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Science fiction task force (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Children's literature (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Reviews?[edit]

Has anyone found out more reviews? We only have one. THat part of the article really needs improvement. --Glimmer721 (talk) 21:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Inaccurate article[edit]

Should the Entertainment Weekly article really be quoted here? It doesn't seem like a very reliable source. Almost every commenter on that page agrees that the reviewer doesn't seem to have read the book. - 131.229.158.89 (talk) 03:48, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

I know. But it is reliable; it was in a magazine. It's just one opinion. --Glimmer721 talk 00:28, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Spell Checked[edit]

I have spell checked the entire article. There were no spelling errors.KF5LLG (talk) 14:57, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Catching Fire - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 04:21, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Romance novel[edit]

I think we should add the genre "Romance novel" to all HG books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.88.4.33 (talk) 05:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I disagree, while there is a love story in the books that is hardly the focus. Andrea (talk) 15:11, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Movie[edit]

The movie needs it's own page already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.255.163.32 (talk) 02:00, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Title of the Book[edit]

Is the title of the book a reference to the Gerard Manley Hopkins poem, 'As kingfishers catch fire, dragonflies draw flame'? evin290 (talk) 21:39, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Catching Fire/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 20:30, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

  • Well written:
  • The article is very well written - I did not even detect any grammatical errors that I needed to fix. It is well-organized, and complies with the MOS guidelines for layout and content in general. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 21:00, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
(a) the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct
(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation
(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline
(b) all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines
(c) it contains no original research
  • Broad in its coverage:
  • The article covers all areas one would expect an article of good quality on a book to cover, and does not contain anything in the way of trivia. If the reviews quoted in the "Critical Reception" section speak the truth about the book, I might say that the article is just as well-paced. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 21:00, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic
(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)
  • Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  • The article's content is completely neutral towards the topic and all related things covered. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 21:00, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  • While the article sees a great deal of vandalism, a check of the revisions over the last three months indicates that no edit warring about the proper content itself has taken place. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 20:39, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Illustrated, if possible, by images:
  • The sole image used in the article is used appropriately under fair use laws, with valid rationale and license provided. It is an essential image to use in illustrating the article, as it depicts the front cover of the book that the article covers. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 20:36, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content
(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

After reading and evaluating the content of this article, I am satisfied that it is ready to be included amongst the Literature GAs. Congratulations! Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 21:01, 22 February 2013 (UTC)