Talk:Tom Shippey/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Kusma (talk · contribs) 08:48, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Will review this soon! —Kusma (talk) 08:48, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks as always. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:01, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Progress box and general comments

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

• Prose: Mostly fine, some comments below.
  • Fixed.
• MOS: No major issues.
  • Noted, thank you.
• References: Layout is fine, most (but not all) are reliable (see below); checking some sources shows that not all support the content (sometimes a simple swap does the trick)
  • I think we're ok on that now.
• Neutral and stable, not copied verbatim from the sources.
  • Noted.
• Pics and captions are fine.
  • Noted.
• Broadness/Focus: The article says nothing about Shippey as a scholar of medieval literature. Beowulf is mentioned only in the bibliography. A broad article should not omit a major part of a scholar's work, even if he is more widely known to a non-scholarly audience for the remainder. Comparatively there is perhaps too much attention on Tolkien's letter.
  • 'Medievalist' section; added some more on this, mentioning both Beowulf and Arthurian legend. It's not just non-scholarly; he's known among his academic colleagues as a Tolkien scholar, as indeed the Festschrift demonstrates.
    • I agree that it is less impactful than the Tolkien work also from a scholarly perspective. But it did need to be mentioned. And yes, it is "medievalist", not my version clumsily translated from German Mediävist. Anyway, much better now. Shippey did also do some Scandinavian studies; I am not sure how much they need to be mentioned, but I thought you might enjoy this review of his book by Lars Lönnroth, another person whose works you have encountered elsewhere :)
      • Great find! Interesting review, I must get the book!

That's it from me. A section about Shippey as a mediaevist/Scandinavist, a little bit about non-Tolkien reception, a bit of source work and some smaller issues below and you should be there. —Kusma (talk) 22:27, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

• • See above.
    • Excellent changes, just some slight issues remaining (above and below in my chaotic review; if you get lost just look at the diff). —Kusma (talk) 16:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

    Happy now, promoting. I have checked the new sources and they are fine and used well. —Kusma (talk) 18:58, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Content and prose review

• Lead: I think the comma before "as well as" should go.
  • Gone.

• The expression crossed paths with those of Tolkien does not make me think of someone who followed in JRRT's footsteps 50 years later.
  • Adjusted.

• participated in Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings film trilogy hmm, maybe "in the creation" or something to clarify he wasn't a hobbit?
  • Done. Though, like Tolkien, I think he'd be delighted to be a hobbit.

• In what role did he feature in the special edition DVDs?
  • As a medievalist.

• Life: boarding school in Scotland before he was 11? Anyway, that doesn't seem to be in the source given?
  • Removed.

• playing rugby That is not in the "The University News" source, but the boarding school in Scotland is. I'm not super thrilled by this source (student newspaper; unclear whether they have done any fact checking)
  • Cited the Festschrift, where there is no doubt at all that Shippey liked rugby!

• When was Shippey a Fellow of St John's College? This is later referred to but we only know it was for an unspecified period of time between 1970 and 1979.
  • It was current in 1972 and 1977. You are surely right that it ran until he moved to Leeds in 1979.

• Not a fan of the LinkedIn ref for the University of Winchester thing. Can't find a much better option either though.
  • I think it's ok here for such a basic fact.
    • Our rules say so.

• Tolkien scholarship: was the Tolkien speech in Oxford or elsewhere?
  • Added.

• The invisible italics story is a bit difficult to parse.
  • Edited.
    • Better!

• His first book no, it wasn't. It was his first book on Tolkien, see the SLU source (11).
  • Edited.

• Does Shippey's shift to a traumatised author theory manifest itself in the book somehow?
  • Added quote from book's preface setting out Shippey's view.
    • Good, but now we have a slight duplication of Vonnegut and Golding. Can you consolidate these?
      • Done.

• over 900 scholarly citations according to Google Scholar, which isn't always correct, but the margin of error you put in is likely enough.
  • Yes, it's not going to be far wrong, and it will certainly increase.

• Modern fantasy and science fiction: anything about the reception of his own fiction? Also, the source for the anthologies (22) gives a 404 error. Archived somewhere?
  • Review sources that I've seen are somewhat bloggy. Archive link added.
    • I'm wondering whether you could also link directly to the mention of Shippey [1], but I don't know how to best format that (for books, you can put a link in the page number; no idea whether we can link to a subpage).
      • Added a link with quote.

• Film and television: what did Shippey do / say in these documentaries?
  • Added.

• Bibliography: Mention that these are only the books, and that there are also a lot of articles?
  • Done.

• Awards: The One Ring Celebration Award Why is this a notable award? Also, the source given is not reliable.
  • Removed.