This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has been flushed out, most of the information is there, and one editor has stated: "I couldn't get three sentences in before seeing more empty phrasing, archaic views, and then, Lord help us all, a list of each sermon with a summary.... I could see that you content yourself with Lord Emmsworth-style pontifical writing."
So, I am looking for language (not the spelling - it is in English, because the appropriate language is 18th century Hiberno English, which is extremely difficult and American English is used by most of the critics cited) and other such problems.
Thanks, Ottava Rima (talk) 20:21, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- The article is very good. I might think that the introduction might indicate the titles of the works, like The Stories of John Cheever, particularly those which have received the most critical response, but am not necessarily particularly knowledgable about such matters. The intro might give a little more detail to who the author is, as he is best known for other, non-religious, works. Maybe, "Jonathan Swift, best known as the author of Gulliver's Travels and other works, also served as Dean of St. Patrick's Cathedral, and wrote several sermons during his tenure ..." Beyond that, though, I'm at a bit of a loss. It might not be a bad idea to contact Wikipedia:WikiProject Books regarding any standards they might have for such works. John Carter (talk) 15:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for your response. I must note - I totally forgot about the intro. Haha. I was expecting more of "this section is too confusing" or the rest. :) I will try to put something together and see how that works. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:17, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
- I made a small update to the intro. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)