Talk:Flowers of Mold

General info

• Scucchiara01 and Brady956
• User:Flowers of Mold

Lead

• The lead section is concise but informational. I like the inclusion of the dates of publication of translation. Although this is also in the info box, not everyone looks at the info box (I know I don't!). The organization of the remainder of the article is made clear in these opening sentences with a reference to the "themes and influences" section. I felt the mention of that section before the meat of the article was helpful because I knew there was going to be a section at the end to tie all the disconnected short story synopses together. Very well done.

Content

• There were no tangents or random pieces of information that appeared to be out of place for the topic at hand. Some of the information within each plot summary seemed a bit disjointed, but I think this was mostly a result of the challenge of summarizing an entire short story in a paragraph without the reader having much background knowledge in the first place. Transitions and switching around the order of a few sentences might help the reader follow along within each short story's summary.
• I think you could potentially add more information to your "themes and influences" section. I want to hear more on how the author uses rot and the other mentioned devices. How do those motifs affect the stories? Including information on the socioeconomic divide, the gender norms, and urban living in real-life Korea could benefit your article. I think that information provides pertinent background knowledge for a reader of both the article and the book.

Tone and Balance

• The tone of the article was perfect! There was no Brady-speak (wink, wink), and y'all did a good job of syncing your writing styles, so it sounded like one person wrote the entire article. it seems as if it might have been easy to argue a certain standpoint when discussing this book. The author's commentating on and critiquing Korean society could have made it easy for you all to likewise add in your own opinions about the country. You did not do this. There were no personal claims made, yet you still managed to portray some of the author's beliefs given in the story. This can be tricky to balance, and y'all did an excellent job.

Sources and References

• The sources look reputable. Good job on citing sources in the first few subheadings. However, there are no sources cited in the final five short story summaries. I think this is okay because wikipedia does not require sources for the summary. It might be just a little odd the first summaries had some, but the last ones did not. The number of sources is fine, and the sources I accessed worked. I am not sure if the book itself is allowed to be one of the sources. If it is not, then you all would need to add one more reputable source.

Organization

• I loved the way you organized this article. The way you set the reader up in the lead section, the ten subheadings corresponding to each short story, and the final remarks that brought the whole thing together . . . all of these aspects heightened the positive experience of the reader. I cannot think of a better way to organize this article. That said, there were some difficulties in the reading of the article grammar-wise. Here are a few tips regarding issues I saw repetitively.
• Be wary of using any form of the word "got" because it is a colloquial term not really seen in formal writing; "become" is the academic version.
• The word "that" is 90% of the time not needed. Sometimes making the following verb end in "ing" allows you to take out the "that". Other times, it can be removed without making any further changes.
• There were several little errors that could be easily fixed with a solid re-read. For example, a sentence toward the end of "Nightmare" reads, "She buries his body in the orchard and the next morning goes to she her parents." Maybe y'all were channeling your inner Yoda? :)
• Read again for apostrophes - both in contractions and with possession.
• There are a few times in which a comma should be added (or removed) before a FANBOYS conjunction depending on whether the following clause is a full sentence or not. Make sure to include both the opening and closing commas when intending to use an appositive, as well.
• Don't forget the rule about not ending a clause/sentence on a preposition.
• If you copied your writing from any other platform, it is likely the italics did not transfer. There was a time or two in which I think either italics or quotations were needed for the title of the book.
• I think your last sentence of "The Woman Next Door" has fabulous potential for parallelism in both story and syntax. You might try that for a punching conclusion.

Images and Media

• There were no images, but I think that is fine because of the newness of this novel.

Info Box

• The info box contained pertinent information and lacked superfluous information.

Overall Impressions

• Overall, I think you have solid information, allowing the reader of your article to come away with a nice grasp of the contents of the book and each included short story. I finished and felt as if I had just watched a well produced teaser trailer of a movie.

Emma.mae16 (talk) 12:53, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Emma.mae16

The Lead sentence concisely and accurately defines the topic. The lead does include descriptions of the major sections, although they seem to be very succinct and offer a very general overview. I would recommend looking at ways to describe the information in the article while avoiding being overly general. The content of the article seems to suit well to the article as a whole. However, I would recommend using your cited sources differently, as some sources are used in the summaries, and some are not. There doesn’t seem to be anything missing from the article. I would try to expand upon the reception of the novel/book by the public as it is important to the overall idea of the success the author has with this particular work. There are no problems with tone within the article. Very good use of neutral tone in the themes section. There are many references and some sources that are well-used. The article does have some spelling errors. There were no obvious grammar errors. The article has four relevant sections, but the "see also" section seems to be just tacked onto the end to fulfill the requirement. There is no image in the article. I would recommend finding an image of the book's cover that is acceptable to Wikipedia and the copyright restrictions. There is an infobox present that has all of the necessary information. Timothy Wales 22:29, 8 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tb3m555 (talk • contribs)

Garrett's Peer review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Scucchiara01/Flowers_of_Mold/GarrettTonos_Peer_Review Brady956 (talk) 22:36, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Great advice from your peer reviews. Be sure to implement their suggestions. Keep trying to get an image in there. Good work! *Yseut229* (talk) 16:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Garrett's Peer Review

Hey guys, my apologies if you couldn't access my peer review. I did not know it was so hard to find. Here is a link to it, in case you want to check it over. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Scucchiara01/Flowers_of_Mold/GarrettTonos_Peer_Review?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_peer_review

GarrettTonos (talk) 21:03, 13 April 2020 (UTC)