Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Mujinga (talk · contribs) 22:54, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Overview[edit]

• I'll take this review on as part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/January 2022, looking forward to reading about this author Mujinga (talk) 22:54, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

• Copyvio check is fine, article is stable and neutral
• Picture licences are fine, could add alts per MOS:ALT
• On caption "The quotation for Patricia Grace on the Wellington Writers Walk" where is the quotation?

• Photo replaced with a more clear image (and alt text). Chocmilk03 (talk) 06:29, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• excellent! new picture licensed ok and relevant, well-captioned Mujinga (talk) 08:38, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• will comment more on lead last, but right now the quote is not in the article body and prob could be shortened also

• Added to article body, removed from lead for the moment (appreciate the lead will need more work!)

• if appropriate, could link ancestral land

• Done

• there's a few phrases eg tangi and marae which could perhaps be defined eg tangi (funeral) but i was also happy clicking through

• Done (appreciate not so clear for international readers!)

• "It was shortlisted for the prestigious Tasmania Pacific Region Prize." suggest cutting prestigious

• Done, I've cut it from a few other places as well (I tend to overuse the phrase!)

• the two other mentions i remember off the top of my head were justifiable i thought, but not this one Mujinga (talk) 11:58, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• having read through the Literary career section I'd say it is a bit topheavy on awards. the writings could be described a bit more, especially since there aren't stand-alone articles for her novels. for example Waiariki has no precis on contents and when you mentioned reviews of Chappy i realised i'd been missing them earlier. this is a broadness and focus issue for me in terms of GA criteria. as an example of what i liked, the Potiki paragraph was balanced although i'd also welcome another line or two on plot

• Sure, makes sense and will start working through this. One initial question, do you think the awards would be better split out into a separate 'Awards and honours' section, or are you thinking the additional plot/reviews info should be just added into what's already there?

• actually yes, an 'Awards and honours' section would be great, and i was even thinking to suggest a separate list article, since there are so many Mujinga (talk) 11:56, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Awesome. I have begun working on this and will continue doing so over the next couple of days.

• "Although the novel was seen by some critics as political, Grace has said that she was endeavouring to write about "ordinary lives of ordinary people" and did not expect it to be seen as political" - source for this is an interview where Grace says "When Potiki first came out there was quite a bit of criticism of it. One of the reasons was because of the use of Māori terms and passages in the book; the other was that some people thought I was trying to stir up racial unrest. The book was described as political. I suppose it was but I didn’t realise it. The land issues and language issues were what Māori people lived with every day and still do. It was just everyday life to us, and the ordinary lives of ordinary people was what I wanted to write about, so I didn’t expect the angry reaction from some quarters." - if you say "some critics" then i expect the source to be about critic X saying Y and critic A saying B\

• Working on this one; I have found one critical source which I think fits in well (the Landfall article), but will hunt around and see if I can find any secondary sources commenting on the political perception generally. Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 06:27, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "In the 1988 Queen's Birthday Honours, Grace was appointed a Companion of the Queen's Service Order for community service" - any view on what Grace thought about that?

• Haven't been able to find anything, unfortunately.

• thanks for checking Mujinga (talk) 10:07, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• overall prose is great, this sentence parses a bit strangely for me - "Grace has been active in the community and voluntary work, including by managing iwi work schemes for unemployed people" - suggest something like "Grace does voluntary work, such as managing iwi work schemes for unemployed people"

• Agreed, done.

• i'd prefer the works section to be selected works to be honest, i don't think we need to list all her writings. interested to hear your thoughts. in any case her novels should have ISBNs, indeed anything with an ISBN should have it

• Sure, happy to make this selected works. I wondered about ISBNs; WP:BIBLIOGRAPHY says "ISBNs are unlikely to be helpful for books that either have had or are to have many editions"; I think this will be the case for at least some of her works, her novels in particular which have been extensively republished. What do you think? Also, when I worked on Witi Ihimaera, the reviewer actually suggested taking information like translations out, see Talk:Witi Ihimaera#Selected works, and basically making each bullet point just Title (Year). Do you have a view about that approach? I really don't mind (as I said on that occasion, I'm never sure how to approach these kinds of sections!).

• Yes it's hard if there is no standard template to follow before. I've had a similar debate before, over at Nicholson Baker and funnily enough Nicholson Baker is mentioned in the examples at WP:BIBLIOGRAPHY. I'm not particularly fussed for any particular style, obviously you need to be consistent with the style within an article, as you are right now. To me ISBNs seem like a good idea to stop spam entries, but I suppose someone could add a spoof ISBN as well. Thanks for the Witi Ihimaera example, I looked at Iris Murdoch and Margaret Atwood but they're a bit different since their books have articles already. I would agree on taking out translations since that seems pretty impossible both to verify and to keep up to date. So in short, it's good as is, maybe just take out the translations then. Mujinga (talk) 10:07, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah I'd seen that in the MOS, that's super interesting! I've taken the approach of simplifying it to just the first publisher & the year of first publication as well, because of the many editions thing; Potiki in particular it would be hard to know where to start.

• do we need a "French language bibliography" in external links?

• Nope, removed!

• DCNZM is mentioned and explained, QSO not

• Done

• ok I'll stop there on first sweep, feel free to make comments/queries if you like, i'll want to say more on lead, spotcheck some refs and i had one other point to make which right now escapes me before i put the article on hold. Mujinga (talk) 23:55, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you! Will work through; one question at this stage, above. :) Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 04:49, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Nice one I see you are working on the article so I'll put it on hold for a week, let me know when you want me to have another look. The refs seem good and I'll save comments on lead for a second readthrough when the new structure is set up. Happy editing! Mujinga (talk) 14:12, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Hiya @Mujinga: I've worked through the content and I think it is looking much better (hope you agree!). Grateful if you could take another look and let me know your thoughts. I have also gone through and tried to improve the lead a bit, although I'm sure more can be done (I struggle with leads!). A couple of comments above as well for your consideration. Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 02:12, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments2[edit]

• yes this is looking great now!
• i replied on the works section above
• another consistency point, in the article you have Māori and in the Simone Drichel quote you have Maori and Maoridom

• Sorted!

• oops, looks like the direct quotes should retain the original orthography (thanks Paora) Chocmilk03 (talk) 00:19, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't know about that revert. The way I read MOS:PMC is that this would be a case of "insignificant spelling and typographic errors should simply be silently corrected". I suppose you could say you want to "retain dialectal and archaic spellings" but I'd say wikipedia article consistency trumps that (just like making Tu italicized below). I'll leave it up to you though, it's not a pass/fail issue. Mujinga (talk) 07:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Tu can be italicised in the Iain Sharp quote

• Done

• if the Sargeson Prize is New Zealand's most valuable short-story prize, is it worth mentioning in lead?

• Nah, she was just the judge for it, so I don't think so.

• the awards section is looking really good, def worth doing that

• Agreed, thanks heaps for pointing out the issues :)

• "In 2005 Grace received an Icon Award from the Arts Foundation of New Zealand, an award bestowed on twenty of New Zealand’s most significant living artists for extraordinary lifetime achievement" - also seems worth mention in the lead

• Agreed!

• " Te Tohu Aroha mō Te Arikinui Dame Te Atairangikaahu | Exemplary/Supreme Award " - the "|" is jarring, but i'm not sure if Te Tohu Aroha mō Te Arikinui Dame Te Atairangikaahu (Exemplary/Supreme Award) is appropriate?

• Happy with that!

• on the lead, it's actually looking good as well, overall the article is a really nice read now.

• Awesome :)

• " and twice winning the top award for fiction at the New Zealand Book Awards" - this doesn't really work for me as a phrase tacked onto the sentence, maybe it's worth making it a new sentence and adding ICON or Sargeson if you agree with the suggestions i just made
• Chocmilk03 nearly there now I think, back to you with a few more comments Mujinga (talk) 10:25, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mujinga: Thanks heaps! Glad you like the improvements. See what you think of the further changes I've just made; happy to adjust further of course. Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 23:19, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one for the work on the article, it's now a good article. I've queried the Māori/Maori revert above. All the best, Mujinga (talk) 07:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]