Talk:Generosity: An Enhancement

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Novels Low‑importance

	Novels portal 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, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Your merger was not so good[edit]

Publishing dates are actually not so clear-cut, so it's best to leave them out.

You arbitrarily removed things ("American"), apparently you just cut-and-pasted your version in, that's not very helpful. The overall effect of that kind of merging is usually jarring redundancy. You have to go back and reread and then rewrite. For example, you in your Draft made points in the "Characters" section, some of which were already here in the "Plot summary" section.

Some of your contribution seems to be a personal essay, that is not allowed on WP. For example, you said the novel "concerns the conflict between genetic enhancement and human nature". Really? They conflict? There are concerns about genetic enhancement, pros and cons, but I don't see any conflict with "human nature" per se.

"Critical reception" suggests there is deeper analysis than typical for a review. "Reception" is fine as is. "Critical analysis" can be used for a section based on deeper studies, I'm not aware of any yet on this novel. Personally, I think a "Reception" section should normally be referenced block-quotes as much as possible, since a sentence-by-sentence version, as you made it, is more difficult to follow. If you don't know how to reformat your quotes, I'll do it. This isn't a hard rule, I used the sentence-by-sentence version in Orfeo since the relevant point was too long/unwieldy to quote, but the ones here seem short and to the point.

In addition, some of your writing was weak: "who becomes well acquainted with both Russell and Thassa". It really doesn't add anything.

Feel free to disagree with me, and share your views. I hope I don't come off as harsh or "in control" or anything like that. I don't mean to discourage you, I see you're a new editor so I'm informing you of things you're not used to thinking about. In fact, I see it was you who edited Richard Powers on Monday and put in the red-link to this novel, which is what encouraged me to create this page and OWS, something I'd been planning to do since I created Orfeo last January, so thanks. Choor monster (talk) 17:52, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]