Talk:Green Eggs and Ham

Unnamed

I know the man that Sam-I-Am pesters is later named "Guy-Am-I" in the Netflix series, but why he still is unnamed in the book other than vague descriptions like "Grouchy Guy" or "Sam's Friend"? Allan Bao (talk) 18:03, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Because he is unnamed in the book. Decisions made by the people behind the Netflix series have no bearing on the original book. Ckruschke (talk) 14:52, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

That's why you left the note to clarify that it is pertinent to the original book where the 2nd character is originally unnamed, besides naming him Grouchy Guy or Sam's Friend.Allan Bao (talk) 13:33, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Green Eggs and Ham/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 14:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Comments

Ah, few articles have such an engaging subject, or so many readers who can recite its text.

• The lead does not do full justice to the sections of the article, and needs extension.
  • I added a little bit, let me know if there are any critical details still missing.
• It closed in 2015 before reopening in 1999. - time travel is evidently another of Seuss's marvellous abilities.
  • No one is supposed to know about that, pretend you didn't see it. Changed.
• I'm not sure that "Background" is quite the right heading for the section, as it mainly concerns "Writing". For me, background would be saying that Seuss was a writer of children's books and had already sold 3 million copies, that sort of thing, i.e. material that sets the context for the book's creation. Its actual construction, the analysis Seuss did, the actual composition and drafting, is in contrast central to the story of how the book came into being.
  • I agree, I used background because that's often what I see. I changed it to writing.
• The last paragraph of "Background and release" could almost fit as "Impact and legacy" (or Reception for that matter).
  • I moved the last few sentences down to impact and legacy.
• Green Eggs and Ham was the first of Seuss's Beginner Books to carry a lesson for children.[1] Dr. Seuss has said that there is no deeper meaning in the book - these statements do come across as contradictory: was there a lesson/meaning in the book, or not? Some clarification would seem to be helpful here.
  • I added a "despite this". Hopefully that covers it?
• overwhelming celebrated -> overwhelmingly celebrated
  • Fixed.

• As "NEA" is only used once after being defined, consider dropping the acronym and just spelling out the name each time it is used.
  • Fixed.

Images

• Cover image has the usual NFUR.

• The other 2 images appear to be correctly licensed. Not that I'd wish to eat in a Cafe that colour ...

Sources

• [22] National Education Association does not verify the claim made. Likely adding an archive will fix the problem.

• [31] Wolff v NH... is tagged as a dead link. Maybe an archive will fix the problem.

• Other spot checks are ok.
  • I save two paragraphs from the original version of the article, and they're the two that turn up sourcing issues. I guess that's on me, but one of these days I'll learn to be less merciful to preexisting text. I archived the NEA references, and I removed the court case reference altogether because it's a redundant primary source.

Summary

This is a well-written and fully-cited article on a topic that will delight many readers. It is very close to being a GA and just needs attention to the few items above. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Chiswick Chap I've replied to everything above. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:57, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Super, it's a GA! Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Inflation conversions

This article contains multiple different inflation valuations for the instigating bet, which come from different years and will be hard to keep updated. Is it reasonable to say just "Over $500 in 2024", so the value is not quite so confusingly precise? Randomairborne (talk) 07:00, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are supposed to have templates included that update the inflation automatically based on the previous year, but it looks like someone tried to add one by hand. I've swapped it out so they both use the template now. Thanks for catching this! Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:24, 31 August 2024 (UTC)