Talk:The Red Badge of Courage/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:46, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Lead

• Leads are my greatest weakness so I'm not very qualified to comment. It looks fine to me.

• Haha, mine as well. They're horrible. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Background

• Check use of logical punctuation - it seems inconsistent with punctuation both inside or outside of quotation marks. I now always put the punctuation outside of the quote marks to avoid inconsistency. But it's up to you.

• From what I can tell, the logical punctuation is correct per the sources used; if I quoted a full sentence, I included the ending period. Unless you noticed something obviously wrong? María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• looks like the knickerbocker sentence is a partial sentence but the quote marks are outside - but if it's the end of the sentence and the period is included, then I go either way with these, putting them outside or inside. I just get sick of explaining to people that the full stop belongs inside. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• I just checked, and it's the end of the sentence. It's taken a few years, but I've become entirely too anal about logical punctuation; I used to think it was such a pain, but now it seems like second nature to me! Blargh. María (habla conmigo) 22:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• I think, according to MOS, words in quotations should never be linked.

• Really? Huh. Removed knickerbockers. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

It's in WP:MOSQUOTE, but actually says avoid linking as much as possible, so it might be fine. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Knickerbocker is such a weird word, so I won't be surprised if someone bluelinks it again in the future. :p Thanks for the guideline tip! María (habla conmigo) 22:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• It's not really important, but I'm curious about the friend. Was he an artist, hence the studio?

• He was an illustrator and painter; he did the lovely portrait of Crane in the lead. He also wrote a book of remembrances called My Stephen Crane. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks - yesterday I was looking at the portrait and was quite in impressed. Corwin K. Linson should be turned blue at some point. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• The chronology needs a bit of tightening - the text says he conceived the idea in the summer/ and had subsequent visits to the studio, which seems to suggest he didn't start writing until sometime later, but then explains that in fact he was writing as soon as June. That threw me a bit.

• I agree, and it's difficult to condense! Crane-writing timelines are difficult to pin down, especially since he was doing so much during this time -- newspaper articles (for money), poems, and the novel. Everything sort of bleeds together and overlaps. I'll try to make this clearer. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Your tweaks helped. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Did he write through the summer? When did he move to New York? Not terribly important, but made me curious.

• It's believed he began the novel in June 1893 and then worked on it intermittently until April 1894. I'll see if I can pinpoint the date he moved to NYC. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Publication history

• Did he do the editing from 55,000 words to 18,000 or was that done by someone else? Was it done for the serialization?

• The latter, and yes. I'll make this clearer. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Again, the tweaking helped. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• "entirety of the twelfth chapter" > maybe "all of the twelfth chapter"

• Fixed. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Why was the Appleton employee worried about disapproval? In what sense?

• It's alleged that the employee might have thought the novel was distasteful, like a lot of things in the late 19th century. I've added this. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Okay, that's good. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Plot

• Check spelling: Union & union

• Fixed. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• I think MOS discourages "whilst"

• Aww. Changed. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Historical accuracy

• Probably should say who (critic or biographer) believed he listened to war stories in the town square - also did this happen when he was a child / youngster / growing up?

• Ugh. This is something that is often thrown about my various biographers and scholars, as if it's so very obvious, but no explanation is given. Crane MUST have listened to war stories! He probably even held interviews! Duh! I'm afraid I can't really substantiate it more than it already has been. He was in and out of Port Jervis throughout his life because of his family ties there, so it could have been anytime. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Don't worry about it - was just curious. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Style & genre

• Awkward patch here: "Throughout the work mentions are made"

• Fixed. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• check punctuation with quotations for consistency

• Hmm, looks good to me, but I'm used to it. Does anything jump out at you? María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• This full sentence with quotation marks on the outside seems inconsistent with the earlier section: "Of course, I have never been in a battle, but I believe that I got my sense of the rage of conflict on the football field, or else fighting is a hereditary instinct, and I wrote intuitively; for the Cranes were a family of fighters in the old days". Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• The quoted sentence goes on after that point, with Crane talking about his ancestors who fought during the Revolutionary War, etc. It's kind of a run-on, which is why I cut it after "old days"; so the period outside the quotes is correct. María (habla conmigo) 22:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• "Crane's realistic portrayal of the psychological struck a chord with reviewers, as one anonymous critic wrote" > semicolon after "reviewers" maybe?

• Good idea, done. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Themes

• explain "enlightened identity" ? I hate it when critics throw out stuff like that which needs to be explained, but I'm lost. How is he enlightened?

• Oh, that's a good point. Will expand that; I can add more about Henry's existential thoughts and such, but I've just added a taste for now. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Much better, thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• "However, that Henry ever matures is questionable due to the text's ambiguity" slightly awkward - can't think of a substitute off the top of my head

• Changed to: "However, the text is ambiguous, making it questionable that Henry ever matures." Better? María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Chapter 7 > chapter eighteen > consistency

• Fixed. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Reception

• link The New York Times?

• Done. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Legacy

• Should probably explain why his career was short for readers who don't know he died young.

• Sure, done. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Crane's "anticipation of the modern spectacle of war has been noted by critics from the 20th and 21st centuries" > a tad passive. Maybe start with critics? Modern critics note, or something like that?

• Okay, changed per your suggestion. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• "went out of budget" > went over budget?

• Much better, done. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Notes

• Some of the notes have author (date) and others not > should probably be consistent.

• The dates are used to differentiate different works by the same author; I've used similar citing tactics at other Crane articles, and I'm kind of partial. :) María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Yeah, I used to do that too, but too many source reviewers now want consistency so I just throw in dates for all the books. Not a big deal here at all, and if it's an issue at FAC, easy to take care of. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Good point. I'll guess I'll cave in and just add the years for everything soon enough. María (habla conmigo) 22:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

References

• NY or New York?

• New York, fixed. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Roy Morris' essay - is that in a collection with an editor? If so, I'd note the editor's name.

• Okay, added. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Images

• File:Battle of Chancellorsville.png - the file says the publishers are Kurz & Allison. Do we know the artist? Not sure it's important, but am curious.

• This is tricky. The LOC overview lists Kurz & Allison under "creator", and nothing else. Perhaps the original artist is unknown? Hmm, now I'm curious. I'll see if I can find anything further. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• Good luck - was only wondering. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Quote boxes

• Should they be treated as block quotes without quotation marks? Also, maybe identify in the box that the text is from the book? Both are a stylistic issues that I'm not too bothered about.

• I never know what to do with quote boxes! I think they add a great visual for the article, but I never know how to attribute, quotes or no quotes, etc. I used quotation marks on Crane's article, and with The Open Boat, but I'm not sure how the MOS treats it. I did start off including "Crane, The Red Badge of Courage" as attribution, but it seemed very repetitive after two or three boxes. Isn't it kind of obvious the quotes are from the book in question? I have no idea. If you think I should change it, let me know. María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

• I treat them as blockquotes without quotation marks and add the source, and a little descriptive tidbit, but as I said, it's a stylistic preference. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I think you're good to go; the outstanding minor issues aren't GA requirements, so no big deal. Just need to update the various pages. Congratulations and good luck with this! Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Great review. I'll keep working on it and it'll probably be listed at PR within the week. María (habla conmigo) 22:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)