Talk:This Tender Land

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Z1720 (talk) 00:48, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that 2019 bestseller This Tender Land is a retelling of Huckleberry Finn set in the 1930s and incorporating elements of Homer's Odyssey? Source: Krueger had written a companion novel to Ordinary Grace, that was accepted and revised, but he pulled it at the last minute and revised it substantially over the next four years, incorporating elements from Huckleberry Finn and The Odyssey. (see also the "Allusions to Other Work" section)
  • Reviewed:

Created by Oceanchaos (talk). Self-nominated at 19:18, 5 July 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: - ?
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - Partially
• Interesting:

QPQ: - ?
Overall: Overall, this nom looks good, with just a few issues. The sourcing is a little dodgy in some parts. The "Allusions to other work" section is mostly unsourced, and unfortunately original research on things like themes and comparisons isn't allowed, so this probably has to be trimmed down. Goodreads and the author's website should be removed as sources (the author's website especially shouldn't be used as a source on the book's reception). Booklist Queen looks like a blog, and should probably be removed as well. Unfortunately that makes the "Reception" section kind of bare, but if you can find alternate reviews that would help. Mentioning that the book made the NYT best-seller's list is fine, but statements that it was "highly anticipated" should either be attributed to a specific source or removed.
The hook source does say that the book is an "updated Huckleberry Finn" but the article currently says that it just "incorporates elements" from the book. It's a minor quibble but it should be an equally easy fix just to keep things consistent between the hook, source and article. BuySomeApples (talk) 20:23, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

This is mostly an aside, but the plot is a bit long. It's currently about 7.2k characters out of 10.2k character page, or just over 1,200 words. WP:NOVELPLOT suggests anywhere from 400 to 700 words, and trimming the plot would also make it more readable. BuySomeApples (talk) 20:23, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

@Oceanchaos: Can you resolve the concerns above and post a message here once that is done? Thanks, Z1720 (talk) 01:38, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

@BuySomeApples and Z1720: The nominator hasn't edited since July 26 and didn't respond to the review. Should this nomination continue or would the time to close it as stale be soon? In addition, the nominator appeared to have one nomination prior to this one so no QPQ is required. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

I'd support marking this for closure one week after my ping to Oceanchaos above. I also left a message on their talk page. If someone else would like to adopt this nomination, they are invited to do so below. Z1720 (talk) 01:29, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5 and Z1720: I'm OK with marking this for closure if Oceanchaos doesn't respond to the review. Normally I'd try to improve the page myself, but I couldn't actually have any luck finding better sources when I looked. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:00, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Oceanchaos: thanks for responding this review! I'm responding to your talk page comment here to keep everything on the review template. I see that you've trimmed down the plot section and added sources to "Allusions to other work." Really great job on this! There's only minor changes left. BuySomeApples (talk) 19:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Would you mind removing Goodreads as a reference and taking the ISBN number out of the lede? The audiobook reference (Ref 7) also needs to be properly formatted, but these should be easy fixes. BuySomeApples (talk) 19:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

"After a major award, an author's next book is generally "highly anticipated", especially if it's almost published, then withdrawn and worked on for four more years." I just transcluded your comment here to make it easier for other people who don't check the talk page. When it comes to using WP:Peacock language like "highly anticipated" in Wikipedia voice, it's usually good to have at least one source that says it (even if it might seem like a reasonable assumption). When it's a statement that might seem promotional, it's even more important. BuySomeApples (talk) 19:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Overall the page looks great, and the hook is good now that the article text has been updated to match. It's sometimes debated whether having a hook fact in the footnotes is enough, but its usually agreed that it should be in the body of the article as well. BuySomeApples (talk) 19:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok, removed the ISBN #, the goodreads and booklist references, added one more, fixed the audible reference (perhaps incorrectly?), and took out "highly anticipated". Looking good now? Oceanchaos (talk) 16:08, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Awesome, this one looks ready! I made a very minor tweak to the audiobook ref. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:35, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

@Oceanchaos and BuySomeApples: I'm going to promote this hook, but I don't think the year is necessary, and stating that it is a bestseller in the hook might be too promotional, so I'm going to remove "2019 bestseller" from the hook post-promotion. Please ping me or open a discussion on WT:DYK if there are any questions or concerns. Z1720 (talk) 00:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Z1720:Fantastic! Thank you again for your help with this. If we remove the date, I want to reword the hook slightly so it's clear it wasn't written during the depression. Would it be okay if the text reads: "This Tender Land is a story of depression-era runaways from the Indian school system, drawing heavily on Huckleberry Finn and Homer's Odyssey."? Should we also mention "...a story by William Kent Krueger of..."? Oceanchaos (talk) 01:16, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

User:BuySomeApples and User:Z1720: Sorry for the long delay, I've been sick and then out of town. Thank you for your suggestions! I cut down the plot summary from 1250 to 850 words (4.6k characters), and included better resources for the allusions to other works and reception sections. I certainly agree that we want to keep things consistent between the hook and article, and authorize any edits you feel are necessary to improve the hook. Re the two "quibbles" you raise, I want to make sure they are addressed, but I also don't feel like I'm misrepresenting anything. 1) After a major award, an author's next book is generally "highly anticipated", especially if it's almost published, then withdrawn and worked on for four more years; I'm not sure how (or why) to footnote that claim. 2) As stated in the first sentence of "allusions to other work", the narrative has the same plot arc as Huckleberry Finn, and just about every item in the footnote section comments on the obvious parallel. "Updated retelling" is a super-clunky phrase and I'd be very much open to something better and more objective-sounding if you have suggestions. I'm not sure how to edit a DYD hook; even attempting to respond to you on this page generated lots of errors. Perhaps, "2019 bestseller This Tender Land is a depression-era story of runaways from the Indian school system, drawing heavily on Huckleberry Finn and Homer's Odyssey"? Thank you again for helping me improve. Oceanchaos (talk) 18:01, 5 August 2022 (UTC)