Talk:Literary devices in The Lord of the Rings

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Literary devices in The Lord of the Rings/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CipherSleuth (talk · contribs) 02:09, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks for taking this on. I'll respond to your comments today, but will have less availability over the weekend. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:38, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Nice job on the article. I'll go over it a couple more times to check against the GA criteria, but looks in excellent shape. If I find anything else I will let you know, otherwise, I anticipate passing the article. CipherSleuth (talk) 21:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I am planning to review the article. I have pasted preliminary comments below. CipherSleuth (talk) 02:09, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Small fixes:

• The first time Jungian archetype is used in the character pairing section, there is no wiki-link.
  • Added.

• Reference 5 appears dead. I click on it but says resource not found.
  • Archived.

More general comment:

• The character Gollum is pictured at the beginning with the caption: “The scholar Brian Rosebury considers Tolkien's narrative portrayal of Gollum (pictured) his most memorable success.” After reading that caption with mention of "most memorable", I thought there would be discussion of Gollum in article, but there’s only a brief mention of Gollum in the character pairing section. I wonder if there is an opportunity to add about literary devices connected to Gollum e.g., if any of the sources talk about symbolism or metaphor regarding that character.
  • Yes, added in 'Prose style'.

• In the prose section, it says that the prose style was "attacked" by Stimpson and Raffel. There's a mention of Stimpson's criticism (who thought the diction was too complex) but no mention of what problem Raffel had with the prose. Might be worth adding a sentence with additional criticism from Raffel.
  • Added.

• Part of one of the sentences in the lead is a little challenging and might not be that accessible to the reader. Specifically this: "...a sequence of tableaux, a complex edifice, multiple spirals...". I don't know if this can be simplified any for the lead or add a wiki-link to tableaux. On the other hand, I guess the argument could be made that the reader just has to scroll down to learn more.
  • Linked and glossed.

Reviewer has checked the article against the GA criteria, including examining references, prose, and images. Nominator has addressed concerns outlined above. Article passes.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: