Kkartaly

Kkartaly, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Kkartaly! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Missvain (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Pros/Cons

Blood Wedding Article (Play by Frederico García Lorca)

Started: 8 November 2004--It looked very different! There was not as much information and there was fragments of ideas and no subsections. Material was then added in January of 2005--not that much just a few more sentences by a different user. To get to its current stage the most recent edit was 2 of February 2017 so edits are still pretty recent. The most recent talk page is 2007. The talk is not always informative but involves connotations of audiences or writers, but most of the comments were purely informative or contributed to the expansion of the page--wanting of contributors to go further. I would say the page is still active because the last edits were made in 2017. Yes, there were a lot of the same people in the groups (Talk and History Page of Blood Wedding)

Pros: The lead is understandable--gives basic information about play with a little context for a nice overview. The structure is clear--the subsections are helpful and informative for material

Cons: Coverage is not neutral--uses a lot of flowery descriptive language which can be interpreted differently The article needs additional citations to make sure that it is verified information Kkartaly (talk) 01:37, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Citation: (Blood Wedding Article)

Evaluation of W.B. Yeats Wikipedia Page

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference?

No, but at least each paragraph is cited so no information is left unchecked per se. One would just not know if all of that came from that one source or multiple different ones.

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

It is hard to tell, because while it is a page on W.B. Yeats, it seemed at times to get into too much detail about the inner workings of his relationship rather than a general summary of how his relationships informed his life.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

Yes, it is neutral political wise; however, the language could be less flowery and more direct.

Where does the information come from? Are there enough and a variety of sources? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

The information comes from mostly different books/history books or specific foundations that specialized in Yeats. For the sections on style and politics, when introducing information, writers would state "Some critics" or "Yeats is generally considered" or "Characters who admire his work" but they don't necessarily write out what other people think of it so in that sense it is somewhat bias, but it is a featured article so it is written well enough where that does not hinder translation of information.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

The viewpoints that are overrepresented are ones that appreciate and value Yeats contribution to the literary field, there is not anything about critiques of W.B. Yeats, though I am unsure if this would be the page to put that on because it is about his life as a whole, not just his writing.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article?

The few citations I checked there was not close paraphrasing or plagiarism.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

No, it is all up to date. Please see answer to next question for what could be added.

Based on your analysis, what changes would you make to the article to improve the verifiability and notability?

Since it is already a featured article, this article is doing well. However, I would maybe add a W.B. Yeats in popular culture or how W.B. Yeats is still informing the literary culture and poetic community to see how it is relevant in today's culture.

Citation: W.B. Yeats Page

Brainstorming

1. Image Journal 2. Little Women 3. The Spinning Heart by Donal Ryan 4. Aran Islands and Other First Plays 5. Sufjan Stevens 6. I Am The Messenger 7. Volcano Choir 8. The Nether 9. John Berger 10. Seamus Heaney's Poetry 11. Amelie (the movie) 12. Kao Kalia Yang 13. The Thirteenth Tale 14. Sarah's Key by Tatiana De Rosnay 15. Celtic Twilight

While there is a page on Donal Ryan with a list of his works, there is not a page specifically for The Spinning Heart published in 2012. This book is important to Ireland and understanding different perspectives. Situated with a plot revolving around the effects of the financial collapse in Ireland, there are many different characters all that are all telling the same story or adding to the story. It reveals the intricacies of not just understanding a situation by one perspective. The dialect of the book as well as the introduction of characters from other countries make it an interesting way to be constantly introduced to new narrators. Within the larger scope of the literary field, this book is important to understanding the rural workers of modern Ireland and how they are still dealing with the results of the past. I know reviews, summaries, and historical contexts have been written about it.

I will find possible sources in newspapers, reviews, and possibly journal articles. 

I can also research other books that he has written as well as other books about the topic of The Spinning Heart to see how they are in conversation with one another. Furthermore, I could also research the publisher and why they decided to accept his piece after it was rejected so many times. I could also research the specific places where this novel takes place.

Other links: Donal Ryan, Ireland, Doubleday Ireland Publisher, Guardian First Book Award, European Union Prize for Literature Kkartaly (talk) 13:45, 2 April 2017 (UTC)