Wikipedia:Peer review/Ellery Queen/archive1

Ellery Queen[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to make it a GA and I've put considerable effort into it. Because the title refers to two different things, it could be difficult to understand. Any tips on how it could be made clearer would be appreciated.

Thanks, Jack234567 (talk) 05:15, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Z1720[edit]

Comments after a quick skim:

Citations are needed for each of the honours and awards.
"Norris, J. F. (2012-12-01)." is a blogspot website. Is this a reliable source?

I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 14:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Rjjiii[edit]

First, I wanted to address the questions at the start of the peer review. So I checked out the articles sources to see how reliable sources describe the two related Ellery Queens and the Ellery Queen media?

"The name was the same for author and hero so that moviegoers and readers who forgot one might still remember the other." New York Times
"Ellery Queen ... Ellery Queen" worldradiohistory.com
"Ellery Queen, the mystery writer and American detective extraordinaire" Ellery Queen website @ spaceports.com
"Ellery Queen is critic and character, reality and fiction" Pennywark (2018)

I think the lead is pretty close to reliable sources in making clear that Queen is both a character and a pen name. Something Pennywark (2018) does that I think works well is to introduce the two the Queens early on, and then for the rest of that article use "Queen" or "Ellery Queen" for the character, and the authors' real names when describing them. I think this could be a valuable tactic to clarify any ambiguous passages.

How you handle that distinction will vary a bit depending on usage. Here are several examples; use them if you wish, but they're not meant to be prescriptive:

Sometimes Queen can just be omitted:

Sentences can be explicitly about the author:

Or sentences can be explicitly about the character:

In the section above, I found "till the end of the 1970s" an odd way to summarize an article from the late 70s. I also saw this sentence, "During the 1940s, Ellery Queen was probably the most popular American mystery writer." cited to page 161. That page is mostly about the character and the character's popularity. Page 162 goes into a lot of detail about the authors but I don't see it describing them as "popular" but as prolific, successful, mysterious, etc.

I think the trickiest parts are where the authors and their characters interact in some way. I would say just make those roles as clear as possible:

Thanks for your patience Jack234567; real life has been bit messy for me recently. Let me know if there is anywhere else you want specific input. Later this week, I'll take a general look at the article. The only things that jump out to me are that you could use {{Cite AV media}} for those bare URLs to make them more resistant to link rot, and the headings are somewhat confusing. Perhaps "Ellery Queen, the pseudonym" and "Barnaby Ross" could both go under a "Writing careers" subheading? And "In other media" should probably be something like "Other media" if the article is primarily about the authors, or merged into the "Ellery Queen, the fictional character" section. Hope this helps, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 08:00, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw this, thanks a lot for your suggestions. I will try to implement most of them, as I think they all make sense. Jack234567 (talk) 02:31, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad they help. Here are a few last notes after looking through the layout and the sources of the article:

Layout:

"Barnaby Ross" and "Ellery Queen, the pseudonym" were unclear to me as the headings for the authors' careers.
I was confused by the "In other media" section several times:
- Which, if any, were Dannay and Lee involved in?
- Without topic sentences or transitions, the "Television" section felt like a puzzle of facts.
- Can the films and comic books be worked into prose?
On my browser the bibliography is nine pages; as a result none of the works stick out to me. I also notice that it contains notes mentioning that is not a complete bibliography. This borders on personal preference and would be considerable work, but you may want to consider the strategy used in Edgar Allan Poe#List of selected works and Edgar Allan Poe bibliography

Source reliability:

What makes prettysinister.blogspot.com reliable? It looks self-published, and it's not clear if the citation is needed for that line or redundant.
IMDB is generally discouraged as user-generated. Are there alternative sources?
The Amazon citation seems less reliable than the end-of-paragraph citation and redunant with that source.

Good luck and Happy Halloween, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 03:41, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your detailed review! To answer some of the points you raised:

1) Since Barnaby Ross is such a minor element of the authors' careers, I don't want to put it in the same category as their main pseudonym by creating a "writing careers" section. Maybe both the "Ellery Queen, the pseudonym" and "Barnaby Ross" sections could be merged but the fact that a different pen name was used for some books in 1932 and 1933 should be mentioned.

2) I can understand why the Television section is confusing. Dannay and Lee were not involved with most of these projects, they only star the fictional character Ellery Queen. Maybe this should be made clearer.

3) JF Norris, the writer of prettysinister.blogspot.com, is generally acknowledged as an expert in the field of classic crime fiction. The paragraph is supported by other sources too, but he does a really good job of explaining the origin of Ellery Queen, so I referenced him.

4) The IMDB / CTVA citations are not ideal I agree, but I think they are accurate this case as the information is also mentioned in the Nevins Biography, CTVA just provides extra context.

I have been rather busy with real life too lately but I hope to work on your suggestions soonish! Jack234567 (talk) 02:20, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]