Talk:Godless (novel)

message: I'm working on this page, but I've been interrrupted.  I'll finish up later when i get the chance.  Feel free to fix stuff, but just know that I'm not done adding to this article yet. A pyrate's life for me... (talk) 21:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Done! 

message: Up for review Your instructor has asked me to look at the outlines for changes that you plan to make to this article. It appears that you have yet to create an outline on this talk page, so it's not possible for me to provide feedback. Please bear in mind that I will be happy to help you, but I can't do that if you don't make any effort yourself. Pacing yourself is key to this assignment and since semester is mostly over, you really need to ensure that you're keeping up with project. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:25, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outline 

message: ====Sources:====
As the article stands now, not many resources have been added—only three—and two are just references for awards. Where the three sources are used, they are clearly placed and cited. The third source appears to be reliable. It is well-implemented in the article. The external link to the author's website is good, as well. However, it would be better if a secondary opinion was used in addition to the author's stance. Surely, there is a fair amount of peer-reviewed opinion on the religious controversy of the novel. 
====Structure:====
The article flows fairly well. However, there is not much content. Half of the article is the character list (which needs to be thinned out significantly). The majority of information given in the character section should be placed in the summary section (which seems like a copy of the synopsis on the back of the novel). The summary needs to tell more of what happens in the book. With the exception of the brief themes sections, there is nothing regarding critical analysis of the book.
====Writing/Grammar:====
The writing in the lead is slightly wordy. For example, "His god is the Ten-Legged God, also known as the water tower, and he is shocked by the consequences of this seemingly obvious jest." Besides lacking a citation, this sentence is confusing. Who is the subject, Jason or the water tower? The character section is well written, but still a little wordy. The lead is the only section that lacks clarity, however.
====Suggestions for Improvement====
First, I would suggest finding more peer-reviewed sources to use as references. Very little of what is written in the article so far relies of resources. Next, work on flushing out the content, using the peer-reviewed sources. Expand the lead; it should be a summary of things to come in the article. Thin out the Characters section, while expanding the Plot summary. Try to reword the summary. Expand the Themes section. Most importantly, add more sections. Depending on what resources are available, add sections about the Genre, Religious controversy, Reception/Awards, etc. It would also be nice if a cover image were added. Finally, in regards to the writing/grammar, I would suggest trying to break up the run-on sentences. Try to clarify the wording in the lead.
EmWriter90 (talk) 16:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review

message: First, I would suggest finding more peer-reviewed sources to use as references. Very little of what is written in the article so far relies of resources. Next, work on flushing out the content, using the peer-reviewed sources. Expand the lead; it should be a summary of things to come in the article. Thin out the Characters section, while expanding the Plot summary. Try to reword the summary. Expand the Themes section. Most importantly, add more sections. Depending on what resources are available, add sections about the Genre, Religious controversy, Reception/Awards, etc. It would also be nice if a cover image were added. Finally, in regards to the writing/grammar, I would suggest trying to break up the run-on sentences. Try to clarify the wording in the lead.
EmWriter90 (talk) 16:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestions for Improvement

message: This article needs more information, I would add and research more articles to add a different dimension and insight to the article. There is so much more to be said about the controversy and themes surrounding this novel. By finding and adding more research that will help with the structure and flow of the article as well, pulling themes and ideas together to make a larger coherent picture of the novel. The plot summary section is lacking and can be expanded to draw on more major happenings in the novel. I think there is the opportunity here to add several new sections about the religion they create, the controversy surrounding the novel, character analysis, the list is really endless. This article now is just the bare bones of what it could be. I would also be very thorough when editing for grammatical and syntax errors and organization. I think the cover art for this novel should be added as well. HaddaBeMe (talk) 17:50, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review (2)

message: I, having read the book, realized that the plot summary section was nearly identical to the blurb i had read on the back, and confirmed this here, under "About the Book." Per WP:ICW I am venturing to boldly remove it and forgo consensus, for it is clearly plagiarism. I understand that, as a newer editor, this may appear like vandalism by blanking, and am open to any necessary discussion. Xxthedeathlordxx (talk) 19:48, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of plot summary section