Talk:Children of Blood and Bone/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Fearstreetsaga (talk · contribs) 17:14, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this article. Fearstreetsaga (talk) 17:14, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

The article looks pretty good. Here are my suggestions:

Lead

• "Critics noted" Replace noted per WP:Words to watch.

 Done

Development and inspiration

• "the second draft, which she was ultimately forced to complete in a month" Is there anything you can find that talks about why she was forced to complete the draft in a month?

Found a source which explained why so I've added that context. Best, Barkeep49 (talk)

• 'though she does not like to be called the "black J.K. Rowling", preferring instead phrases like "the new J.K. Rowling"' I'm not sure what connection this statement has to the book or its development. I would consider explaining the connection, putting this in a footnote, or getting rid of it.

This was her first book so coverage of her and the book were nearly identical. The Harry Potter comparisons are rampant in coverage of her/the book and deserve mention in the article, as would I think, her response to this appellation. Best, Barkeep49 (talk)

Ok, I see. I would mention that she made these comments in response to comparisons being made between the book and Rowling's work, because the text does seem out of place to me without this context. Fearstreetsaga (talk) 18:01, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Plot

• Why do Kaea and Inan want to destroy the scroll?

 Done

Themes

• "but Zélie and Amari continue" I feel this sentence ends a little abruptly. Consider explaining what Zélie and Amari are continuing.

 Done

Reception

• 'David Canfield of Entertainment Weekly called the novel a "phenomenon".' I think this could go into more detail so readers understand why Canfield likes the book or what he likes about it.

 Done Also note, as evidence about the Rowling thing, the headline on this review as one such example (of many) of that comparison. -Barkeep49

• "Less positively, the The A.V. Club said the book failed to live up to its hype." As above, consider adjusting this to explain why The A.V. Club did not like the book.

 Done

Audiobook and sequel

• I found several references talking about the audiobook and some of the awards it has won that you can consider adding to the article: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]

Thanks. There's enough out there that I made an audiobook section.

• It looks like there is information about the sequels starting to pop up that you could think about adding as well.

The sequel is going to be notable in its own right (and arguably already is at least compared to movies at a similar stage) so I have simply noted it with a one sentence note in publication history for now. Best, Barkeep49 (talk)

Fearstreetsaga (talk) 02:23, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Fearstreetsaga for the suggestions and review. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:20, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

@Barkeep49: The changes look good. I did leave a suggestion in regards to one of your responses above, but I'll go ahead and pass the article anyway because I'm happy it meets the GA criteria. Congratulations! Fearstreetsaga (talk) 18:01, 8 April 2019 (UTC)