 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
untitled edit
- The first sentence is a run-on. You could either make it two sentences or add “,and it was” after the author's name to make it compound.
- “2002” should not be in parentheses.
- You should add a comma after 2004.
- The third sentence is incomplete. I believe you are trying to say that the book also won these awards. It should read something more like “The poem also won the T.S. Eliot shortlist (2006) and the Costa Book Award.” There shouldn’t be a comma between the two awards because commas are for listing three or more things.
- In my opinion, the last sentence would sound better if you removed “is a poem that.” Maybe that’s just my preference, though.
- I think that you have very good information! :)
Bmichelleh (talk) 02:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
- Kt roggers, I think you need to rewrite this. Look at one of the many examples we looked at in class. What you have written is many things, including an appreciation of sorts, but that is not what we are doing here: you need to write an encyclopedic article about the collection. Dr Aaij (talk) 14:28, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
- And I can't really tell what is in the book. It can't be just one poem--is it? One long poem? Dr Aaij (talk) 02:49, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Review edit
The opening explains what the poem is, some info on who it was published by and when, and why it is notable. The structure is straightforward, there is the opening and the summary of the poem with good sources. I think there could be a little more variety in topics, maybe 1 or 2, perhaps about the critical response and the author's inspiration for it. That would help give it a balanced coverage. The sources are well-cited. HistoryNerd52 (talk) 18:58, 26 June 2019 (UTC)