# Talk:Kate DiCamillo

The last sentence in paragraph two of Personal life reads: Her brother, Curt DiCamillo, is a noted architectural artifact. This seems to be grammatically incorrect as a person cannot be an artifact.
Also, "Newbery" is spelled wrong in the first paragraph.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.106.94.136 (talk) 16:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC) 
caralho desta merda vam se foder  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.154.93.58 (talk) 18:41, 11 January 2011 (UTC) 

Removed (Redacted) from the end of 'Life' section Irish Melkite (talk) 09:12, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for removing the vandalism, however there is no point in repeating the slur here.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots  21:39, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Kate DiCamillo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090110082638/http://moreresults.factiva.com:80/results/index/index.aspx?ref=HLYW000020060530e25o0002j to http://moreresults.factiva.com/results/index/index.aspx?ref=HLYW000020060530e25o0002j
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I changed "is" to "was" and removed the flag for dated information. That takes care of the problem, no? KC 04:13, 10 March 2016 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boydstra (talk • contribs)  

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kate DiCamillo/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 03:05, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Starts GA Review. The review will follow the same sections of the Article.  Thank you --Whiteguru (talk) 03:05, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @Whiteguru, do you have a timeframe for when you might have this review up? Eddie891  Talk Work  13:56, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
@Eddie891 It's in my sandbox, complete, basically. Plan is to comb through the article again. I should be able to put this up tonight. --Whiteguru (talk) 20:02, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 


### Observations
   HTML document size: 170 kB
   Prose size (including all HTML code): 24 kB
   References (including all HTML code): 66 kB
   Wiki text: 36 kB
   Prose size (text only): 13 kB (2141 words) "readable prose size"
   References (text only): 7656 B

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
In the lead,  Her works have won various awards; duplicates an earlier sentence. Suggest removal of this part.
cut Y
(Biography) after several jobs was hired to work in a The Bookman (drop the "a" )
cut Y
(Biography) is a link to maternity leave necessary?
cut Y
(Biography) The article is about this author, not her editor. Drop the reference to Kara LaReau.
cut Y
(Biography) Afterwards, DiCamillo moved into a house; the trappings of succcess are important, but is this necessary for this article?
cut Y
(Writing career and recognition) DiCamillo said she was shocked by the news and "very, very happy."[21]  What news? insert (of the award)
added Y
(Writing career and recognition) and ending with Mery Watson: Something Wonky This Way Comes (2009) spelling Mery → Mercy
fixed Y
(Writing career and recognition) DiCamillo was reportedly woken up at 5:30 a.m. with a call telling her the news and said she was stunned by it.[26] is superfluous...
cut Y
(Writing career and recognition)  "Stories Connect Us".[27]{[29] In both the ← stray curly brace in there
fixed Y
(Writing career and recognition) In The New York Times the author Kimberly Brubaker Bradley wrote that . Bradley is writing as a reviewer. drop the author.
I think it's a relevant description so the of what Brubaker is notable for so they aren't necessarily left thinking "who is she"? accepted Y
(Writing career and recognition) overlinking:  I am not inclined to link to Minnesota, nor Tim Walz, however gubernatorial he is.
Cut link no Minnesota, not sure why linking Walz would be overlinking, could you elaborate? In this particular context, it appears a superfluous link; I am not convinced readers of this  (rather good and readable) article will leave it to go read about a governor...  Y
(Adaptations) overlinking: drop links to Netflix and Walt Disney Pictures and cameo.
Cut link to cameo, not sure why Netflix/Disney are overlinks, could you elaborate? These are common words (easily recognized Titles) in the public domain. Why do we need links to material that is commonly recognized? Y
(Analysis) the link to read between the lines, goes to a 404 and then to archive.org. Repair?
Ran IABot Y
Reference 46 should say (subscription required)
Reference 53 should say (registration required)
All references using the New York Times will have to say (subscription required).
Fixed the above Y
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Page is "readable prose size"
Good coverage of this author and her works
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
NPOV is presented in this article.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
Page created 7 January 2005
Page has 1,234 edits by 649 editors
ClueBot NG has been on the page (both versions) 47 times, indicative of vandalism
Page size has expanded considerably since 2020
90 day page views = 24,337 with a daily average of 268 page views.
Recent page history indicates puerile vandalism, likely by children (IP addresses) as DiCamillo is a children's author
Page has a reasonable number of active watchers; it is noted that vandalism like the above is reverted quickly.
Else, page is considered stable with steady improvement.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
File:2018-us-nationalbookfestival-kate-dicamillo.jpg = Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.
File:Magician's Elephant (signed) (cropped).png =  Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International, 3.0 Unported, 2.5 Generic, 2.0 Generic and 1.0 Generic license.
File:Kate DiCamillo 9198 1024 (27648278583).jpg =  originally posted to Flickr by Kalamazoo Public Library at https://flickr.com/photos/28641332@N03/27648278583 = no known copyright restrictions

Overall:
Good coverage of the work and labors of this author
Some clean-up noted
The New York Times: repeatedly had to go to archive.org to examine references. Might be worthwhile running the IA bot over the references and see if this sorts the matter for you.
After minor clean-up, this should go to GA. --Whiteguru (talk) 20:51, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Whiteguru, responded to most, some q's. What say you?
@Eddie891 See my comments above.  --Whiteguru (talk) 08:03, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
OK, @Whiteguru, that's fine. I've gone ahead and cut those three links. Thoughts? Eddie891  Talk Work  16:26, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
@Eddie891 You have a Good Article! --Whiteguru (talk) 20:22, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 
 Passed

 

"an older brother and often a pet dog" reads sort of like "Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."
Why does moving to Clermont help pneumonia?
The warm climate- should I add something about this? Eddie891  Talk Work  13:42, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Maybe a teensy bit just to clarify? AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:45, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Added a mention, not sure if it's great as is, however... Eddie891  Talk Work  16:14, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Anything about her early life between elementary school and college?
Not really that I could find. Which makes some amount of sense given that interviewers pretty much only ask her about the demographic she writes books for
"sat around for the next seven or eight years" - I may be wrong but I think we usually cite any direct quotes directly after the quote
Sure, can do
Is a "picker" the same thing as a "buyer" in other retail contexts?
"waking up at 4:00 am before her shifts on weekdays to write around two pages" - how early were the shifts? Two pages doesn't seem like a lot unless the shifts were at like 5 …
Not sure on this one... cut the two pages and four am specification because I bet it's an over generalization
Is Jane Resh Thomas notable? Being encouraged by her doesn't seem DUE unless we should have an article on JRT.
On a quick search, yes almost definitely meets NAUTHOR ([2], [3],[4]). I've redlinked Eddie891  Talk Work  01:14, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
A few sentences like the following could use breaking up as they're either run-ons or confusing. These look like classic crowdsourced prose that just needs to be smoothed out. "DiCamillo moved to Minneapolis in 1994, following a close friend, and after several jobs was hired to work in The Bookman, a book warehouse and distributor, as a picker, eventually in the children's book section, a placement that she was initially disappointed over."
"DiCamillo's first book to be accepted for publication was Because of Winn-Dixie by Candlewick Press ..." Is this meant to indicate that Candlewick Press was the publisher that accepted it? It reads as if Candlewick Press wrote it, which obviously it didn't.
"She was offered and signed a contract." Was the thing "offered" a contract or something else (a broader deal, perhaps?) What was the contract for?
Why should we be relying on Mpls St Paul Magazine for literary criticism?
"The success of her books was described in 2006 by a Candlewick Press as being a "cornerstone" of the publisher's success." Looks like a missing word between "a" and "Candlewick". Also the passive voice is jarring here—it looks like the sentence was written to avoid WP:PROSELINE but it comes off more awkward than just repeating "In [X year], ..."
Is a "china rabbit" a rabbit made of porcelain?
Throughout, the Writing career and recognition section reads as quite list-y. I wonder if it and Analysis could be combined? Or if some of the necessarily more listy content (awards, etc) could be worked  into the bibliography section?
Perhaps  I could split the less exciting awards to an awards (sub)section? Eddie891  Talk Work  01:21, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
I never quite know what to with awards. They don't say very much other than that "hey, this person was recognized by this organization". I personally feel it's clearer and cleaner to use list style with things like that but my sense is that most people disagree? AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 05:59, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Moved a bunch of them out, left a few residual ones Eddie891  Talk Work  15:20, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
"rediscovered in 2018" - confused about how a manuscript by a living novelist could be (re)discovered
What makes Victorian or Edwardian children's literature distinctive as genres and how is KDiC's work similar to that? Very interesting idea that could use development. This sentence would also benefit from a cite right after it I think.
"According to the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry" - unless it's an editorial, this should be attributed to the authors of the article, not to the journal. Also why is a psychiatry journal featured so prominently in this context?
Analysis could use some clearer focus for each graf - it's kind of hard to follow the thread rn. WP:RECEPTION might have some ideas.
"In that style, she usually only writes one book at a time." What is "that style"?
Some sticklers may demand cites for each book in the bibliography if it's not bluelinked or mentioned elsewhere. I'm not one of them, but I've been burned before (at least at WP:ITNRD) so something to watch out for.
Do secondary sources distinguish between chapter books and novels in her corpus (or picture books, for that matter)? Faintest tinge of OR here.
Maybe we should trim the bibliography to a selected one? Eddie891  Talk Work  15:21, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
ELs could use some trimming.
Done
If you will be taking to FAC, the cites should be in a consistent style. I actually like doing that sort of thing so would be happy to convert non-templated refs to CS1 if you like.
Another look at the cites for the awards section would be good - I see one cited to an archived page on google docs ...
"Upon taking that role, she utilized the theme 'Stories Connect Us'" - what does it mean to "utilize a theme"? This sentence reads awkwardly to me in general.
Thanks for the message. Most of these are pretty minor. Main overall substantive comment, especially after a lot of time recently spent over at Wikipedia:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1, is that Analysis could use an infusion of scholarly sources (if any exist—I'll have a look and am happy to send you PDFs, courtesy of my university, if you can't get them via WP library) and a clearer structure. At the moment I'm not sure if the sourcing for that section meets WP:WIAFA 1(c). But again, this really depends on whether such scholarly sources exist. I've been struck by how much scholarly work there is on children's lit generally, but of course that says nothing about whether there's anything on KDiC in particular. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 00:53, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

I was rather upset at how little scholarly analysis of her work I could find, especially compared to some of the other children's lit I've looked at... If you find anything please do let me know.Thanks for taking a look, I'll go through and respond as I can find the time! Eddie891  Talk Work  01:03, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
I had a look and you're right—there are reviews in scholarly journals of plenty of her books but none of the broader-brush criticism I was expecting. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 05:59, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

These basic biographical details are always surprisingly hard to track down:

"Katrina Elizabeth DiCamillo" is also attested here, which looks like a bio for young readers, but I see no reason not to trust it (pace the typo reproduced below). But I don't see it in that many other places.
I agree, I asked on the ref desk/H, and nobody found much else attesting to it. But no real reason to doubt it, either. Kinda strange. I can definitely imagine a kids book author checking Wikipedia/Britannica and mindlessly repeating what they saw there... Eddie891  Talk Work  01:17, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
All sources I've seen agree in 25 March 1964.
Contemporary Authors says "Merion, PA", which must mean Merion Station, Pennsylvania; [5] also says Merion; Something About the Author says Philadelphia; [6] says Philadelphia without giving a precise birth year; [7] also says Philadelphia; Sue Corbett's bio says "a Pennyslvania (sic) hospital near Philadelphia", which seems like the most likely candidate to be completely accurate.
Thoughts? AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:20, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps I will message her via twitter or similar and ask for clarification-- then we can have a better idea of what to trust, even though it of course wouldn't be acceptable as a source here. Eddie891  Talk Work  01:17, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
OK, no tweets... perhaps via somewhere else... Eddie891  Talk Work  01:17, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Maybe FB Eddie891  Talk Work  01:18, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Sometimes authority file entries such as those at Kate DiCamillo (Q467066) can be useful, but my initial look at those (sometimes the Library of Congress ones will indicate that one of their staffers called the writer and got them to confirm stuff) didn't reveal anything we didn't know already. Short of OR-lite on FamilySearch or similar, I don't know what else to suggest. One could always write " ... was born in or near Philadelphia" with an {{efn}} to explain further. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 00:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)