Wikipedia:Peer review/Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows/archive2

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows[edit]

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
.

I've listed this article for peer review because this is the last Harry Potter book and I would like to nominate it for an FA later.

Thanks, Guy546^(Talk) 00:51, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this article - I have read this book several times and would really like to see it get to FA. That said, I do not think this is ready for FAC yet, so here are some suggestions for improvement.

The External links checker tool in the toolbox on this page shows three dead links and some others that may be problematic - these will have to be fixed before it can become a FA
I don't think the lead really follows WP:LEAD - it is supposed to be a summary of the article and as such not have anything that is just in the lead. For example, the publisher in Australia and New Zealand is in the lead only, as is the fact that the previous record for sales was held by Half-Blood Prince.
I usually write (or rewrite) the lead last - read the whole article and then write the lead as a summary. Imagine someone could read only the lead - what would you want them to know about the book?
Italics are not used for direct quotations per WP:ITALIC and WP:MOSQUOTE
I would avoid short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections as they interrupt the flow of the article. The sentence On the dedication page for this book, the unusual layout resembles the shape of Harry's scar.;; reads like OR and needs a ref.
Parts of the Rowling's commentary and supplement section need references added. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
The article needs more free images. Couldn't a picture of JK Rowling be used, for example?
The plot section is very concise, the epilogue is quite wordy - seems as if there could be a better balance between the two.
I am concerned about WP:WEIGHT issues - I checked with the page size tool and here are the section sizes in Bytes and words "readable prose size": Plot summary is 3036 B (472 words), Epigraphs is 273 B (48 words), Dedication is 152 B (26 words), and Epilogue is 1103 B (189 words). For material not even in this book, Plot introduction is 2757 B (447 words) and Rowling's commentary and supplement is 4223 B (670 words).
So, in terms of bytes, the sections on the book except for the plot (Epigraphs, Dedication, and Epilogue) are 1528 B, or 50.3% the size of the plot summary. This means either they are too big, or it is too small or perhaps a bit of both. The Epilogue and intro sections are much more detailed than the plot section. I would make the Epilogue less detailed and make plot a bit more detailed (for example there is no mention in the plot section of the wedding or the deaths of Mad Eye Moody or Dobby or Remus Lupin or Tonks (or even strictly speaking, the death of Voldemort). Why should Teddy Lupin, a very minor character, be mentioned in the Epilogue section, when his parents, who were major characters are not mentioned at all?
Even more worrying, the section on what Rowling said happened after the book, but which is not actually in the book itself, is 139% the size of just the plot section. Almost 40% more bytes are devoted to things that are not in the book than the main plot of the book itself. ANother way of looking at it is that the whole Contents section is 11 kB (1852 words) and the Plot section is only about 27% of that (even with the long Epilogue added, it is only about 39%). Please note that I have no trouble with the Plot introduction section, as this is very helpful for the 7th book in a series.
Parts of the Rowling's commentary and supplement section need references - especially when there is a direct quote
Having read the article, it really does not flow well. I would look at the suggested article outline in WP:NOVELS
A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - there are 33 WP:FAs at Category:FA-Class novel articles, which seems like a source of good models to follow.
Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I closed and deleted peer review 3 as this was still open - here is the relevant text from that. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would like feedback on a new section I have created. Comments are appreciated. Thanks, Guy546^(Talk) 23:04, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was asked to comment further. What I do not like about the article is the mis-match in the level of detail in the plot of the whole novel except for the Epilogue vs. the summary of the Epilogue and the material Rowling revealed after the book's publication. There is literally more material in this article on the things Rowling revealed afterwards than there is on the plot of the novel itself. Now as I mentioned, I have read this book several times and really like it, and I think it is important to have some indication of what happened after it somewhere in Wikipedia. I am not convinced that this is the place for it though.

I also worry about comprehensiveness of coverage, which is a FA criterion. For example, there is relatively little on the writing of the novel, but Rowling revealed that she originally was not going to kill off Tonks and Lupin, but decided she had to after she spared Mr. Weasley's life. The book was named best novel of the year by Newsweek's critic - see here, which is not mentioned. Newsweek and The Wall Street Journal had detailed reviews, one of which focused on Christian themes in the novel and series (think it was the WSJ). I also seem to recall ROwling saying in an interview that the last word of the last novel was "scar" and then she changed it and talked about it.

Parts of the article read as if they were written before the novel was released and have not been changed since (Background)

Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I echo Ruhr's comments. While it's fairly solid for a GA (although I'm not sure I'd have passed it now as opposed to when I did in 2009), the main issue is that the plot is overbalanced compared to other content, and much more could be added about critical reception and development of the novel. Also, I think most of Rowling's supplementary comments could be summarized; the actual fates of the characters are more relevant at the article pages for the characters. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:59, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Final thoughts

Would it be possible to make a new article with the material that Rowling said happened after the book was done? I recall that "Dumbledore is gay" got a fair amount of press at the time, and I am guessing that enough reliable sources exist to have a short article, which this one could use WP:Summary style for. Also if Rowling ever writes / finishes / publishes the Potter universe encyclopedia that there was talk of, this could then become part of the background to that article. Just a thought.
I am also OK with the adding information to the HP character articles
I can't copyedit the whole thing, but I can make some suggestions on the new section. First off, I would just call it "Themes" - I am not sure the reviews are really interpreting the themes, and headers are usually short and sweet.
I would start the section with the current last sentence, but make it clear that it was something Rowling said before the book was published. So perhaps something like In a 2006 interview, before Deathly Hallows was published, Rowling said that the main theme of the series is Harry dealing with death.[60] then go on to mention reviewers who agreed with her.
I would make sure that all prominent reviews are included - for example, the Sunday Times had two reviews here and here
There almost have to be books about this novel that have been published in the past 3 and half years...

Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:27, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also thought the article seemed complete. The tone is factual and objective. The language is simple, the sentences are not convoluted but straight to the point. One observation that I share with the previous peer reviewer is that there is a discrepancy in the amount of detail is certain sections (e.g.introduction: "The novel has also been translated into numerous languages," an actual number, even if it's to say "over 120 languages" may be better)
Another possible concern is in terms of the referencing. Though the introductory paragraph provides a lot of useful information, there isn't a single endnote (e.g. "There are many themes in the book, including growing up, dealing with death, as well as many Christian allegories"... where did this "fact" or interpretation come from?).
In terms of presentation/formatting: you might consider putting the "awards and honours" section in bullet/list format. Perhaps a table.
A section that may be missing is a section with the editions of the book.
Maybe the target audience could be added into the info box--MalikaZ (talk) 23:03, 10 February 2011 (UTC) and user:Ar1681[reply]

Reply Would the "Editions" section work? Thanks, Guy546^(Talk) 19:05, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the plot introduction, you may want to consider stating which books the events you are discussing are from to give readers who are unfamiliar with the series a reference point. --Eca264 (talk) 17:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]