Talk:To the Stars: The Autobiography of George Takei/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

This is a good little article as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far enough to meet the good article criteria at this time.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   I've fixed up a few minor items myself.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Several important aspects are unaddressed; see comments below.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I look forward to the article being improved

These are the areas the article doesn't address:

• How did the book originate? Was it Takei's idea, or did a publisher come to him? How much of an advance did he get?
• How was the book written? I've seen people say that he really wrote it himself, and didn't use a ghostwriter. If a WP:RS can confirm that, it's definitely important to mention.
• I haven't read the book, but I've seen commentary that he doesn't describe his personal life at all in it. That's worth mentioning, as is that he chose not to come out as a gay person at this time, but rather waited another 11 years. That shows that while he may have been revealing about his Japanese American/internment upbringing and his professional career in this memoir, he held back about other things.
• What forms was the book released in? Was there a paperback edition, if so what year, publisher, etc? The "first published" in the article's first sentence implies that there are other forms later, but nothing is said of them. Is it still in print in some form?
• Was there an audio book? I believe there was, read by Takei, and that should be described.
• What were the publicity efforts for the book like? Did Takei go on radio/TV promotional appearances, hold book signings, etc? The George Takei article says that his ties to the Howard Stern show originated in a promotional appearance for this book, if true that seems worth mentioning.
• How successful was the book commercially? How many copies did the hardcover sell? Did it make any bestseller lists? How many editions were printed, how long did it stay in print, that kind of thing. How does it compare with the other TOS cast autobio's in terms of popularity?
• The article discusses its critical reception, but how was it received by the Trek fan base?
• Did the book get any negative reviews? Including just one, and the reason behind it, might make the article more credible to certain kinds of skeptical readers. If it didn't get any, then so be it.

Until these aspects of the book are covered, the article really isn't complete enough to warrant GA status. Let me know if you have any questions or issues regarding these comments. Wasted Time R (talk) 00:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Reply

Okay thank you these are valid points. I will do some more research and attempt to address them, and then note it here below. Cirt (talk) 01:49, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I haven't gotten to this yet, will do some more research shortly. Cirt (talk) 04:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, no rush. Wasted Time R (talk) 04:11, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

So sorry, have had other things on my plate, hadn't gotten to this yet. Actually it took some work to find the secondary sources used already for the article, but I'll do a bit more research to try to respond best to above points. Cirt (talk) 17:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Is the end of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GAN backlog elimination drives/Spring 2009 on March 13 a reasonable goal? That would be four weeks from the time of the initial review, compared to the usual one-week period for a hold. Alternatively, if you feel you just don't have the time/resources/interest/enthusiasm/whatever for this now, I could fail it without prejudice and you could do the research without pressure and submit it for another GAN later at a time of your choosing. In other words, this is supposed to be fun, not like having multiple projects due at once in school and falling behind ... Wasted Time R (talk) 17:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Option 1 is fine, and if I don't make it Option 2 is okay as well. :) Cirt (talk) 18:00, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

That day has come, so Option 2 it is. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:20, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay no worries. I will definitely work on the above suggestions over time and strive to improve the article's quality. Cirt (talk) 14:48, 13 March 2009 (UTC)