Wikipedia:Peer review/The World's Greatest Unsolved Crimes/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I created it and have taken it as far as I think I can.
Thanks, Oliver
Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this article. Just so you are aware, the Notability banner at top would normally disqualify the article from peer review (as articles at PR cannot have major cleanup banners). Here are some suggestions for improvement.
- As noted, one of the major issues with the article is notability, specifically Wikipedia:Notability (books), which says in part that A book is generally notable if it verifiably meets through reliable sources, one or more of the following criteria: The book has been the subject[1] of multiple, non-trivial[2] published works whose sources are independent of the book itself,[3] with at least some of these works serving a general audience. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries and reviews. Some of these works should contain sufficient critical commentary to allow the article to grow past a simple plot summary. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.[4] I do not know if this book meets that criterion - there are others listed at that page, but they seem likely not to be applicable here.
- Assuming that there are reviews etc of this book and that it meets notability guidelines, then the article needs more secondary independent sources that meet WP:RS (i.e. are reliable) - please see WP:V and WP:CITE
- A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. There are many articles on books which are WP:FAs and would be good potential models. The World Without Us is a FA book article.
- Things present in most book articles and missing here include a section on how the book was written, the publishing history (I see this is a second printing), and a critical reception section. Note that the plot or synopsis is only a summary (and is barely mentioned in the model "The World Without Us").
- I worry here that the article goes into such detail on the contents that it is a potential copyright violation - see WP:COPYVIO and WP:NFCC
- The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way
- The disambiguation tool in the upper right corner of this page finds two dab links that will need to be fixed.
- So basically you need to add additional sources that are independent of this book to establish notability and expand the article so it is more about the writing, publication, and reception of the book, and trim the current content so it is not a possible copyvio.
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:11, 22 August 2010 (UTC)