Talk:Shannon Burke (writer)

Discussion during review at Articles for Creation

@Archer1401: When you asked your question at the Help Desk, your concern was with the correct use of the references. But it isn't so much that you were using them incorrectly, it was that you weren't using them to full effect. You can see that I've re-structured your draft to include a "Critical reception" section. This is where you can really make your case for the notability of the author. You've collected some pretty good sources, so now's your chance to tell the reader what those sources say. Rather than simply tell the reader that the books were favorable received, show the reader that the books were favorably received. What I have in mind is a three-paragraph section, with one paragraph per novel. Perhaps start each paragraph with a one-sentence description of the book (i.e., setting, genre, etc.) and follow that up with well-chosen quotes from each review. And when doing this, you probably don't want to just quote single words such as "good" or "enjoyable". Instead, find a sentence or two that gives some flavor of the overall review and that paints the author as someone who has produced a unique or memorable work. Also, remember that quotes must be given in-text attribution to the reviewer, so that the reviewer's name shows up both in the article and in the footnote (and it will be helpful to identify the publication, too -- such as "In her review for [NAME OF PUBLICATION], [NAME OF REVIEWER] found that ... ".

And just to be clear, I moved all of the reviews into the Critical Reception section just to have them all in one place. They shouldn't appear in the final draft of the text; they should appear as the footnote-references for the material that you are going to quote.

Formatting the references is much easier if you use citation templates. In the references (which now appear in the Critical Reception section), you'll want to use the {{cite web}} template. I filled in one of them as an example; I'll leave the rest of them to you (and this includes the references in the Awards section). Similarly, the Novels section can be made more presentable by using the {{cite book}} template. Here, too, I did the first one and left the rest to you (but I wasn't sure of the location of Random House, so you'll need to fill in that one, as well).

You'll see some "citation needed" tags. This is material that must either be sourced or removed. IMDB is not a reliable source, so some other source will be needed for the subject's involvement with film and television. Personal details on the subject's family absolutely must be sourced, as will the statement that two of the novels were based on the subject's personal work experience. For the latter two, perhaps the interviews have something relevant.

Finally, the official website is a dead link, so I removed it. Also, we don't use external links for sources that already appear as references, so I moved all of the review links into the Critical Reception section. If you end up using the interviews as references, then these will also need to be removed from the External Links.

I hope all of this is helpful. Feel free to ask follow-up questions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 22:25, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

@NewYorkActuary: I know I've been AWOL for a few weeks, but just want to say I finally found this page, and this is unbelievably helpful. Thank you so much. I will try to implement these changes. User:Archer1401