Talk:I Am Not Going to Get Up Today!/GA1

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

Nominator: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs) 21:58, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A kid's book article with philosophy. I'm in. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:58, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Although this article is on the shorter end, which I normally complain about, it includes all the sections I would expect for broad coverage, and they are as complete as they can be based on the sourcing.

• In the lead I would identify Alexander as an actor, for context (and also in the body) - you can't necessarily assume people know who he is
• No gripes about the plot summary
• I feel like there might be a way to condense "written by Dr. Seuss. By the time Seuss began work on this book, his health had begun to fail." into a single sentence, although I won't die on the hill of trying to find it
• Since you later mention Seuss is a pseudonym, it might be worth mentioning it in the first sentence so it doesn't come as a surprise
• "It was the first one" - 'first one' reads a bit casually. Maybe "First work" or "First publication by Seuss in eight years"
• You managed to integrate Socrates pretty neatly, which is fun
• If you're trying to get this to FA level, I might suggest noting other books that Einhorn compares it to, but that's at your discretion and not GA-prohibitive
• "the method of Kenneth Burke" this is a bit opaque if you don't know who Burke is or what his method was.
• "its unpopularity relative to other Dr. Seuss books" - this comes from having Reception under Analysis, but right now this comes as a surprise to the reader. I realize Reception is combined with Legacy, but I think it still makes more sense to move it above Analysis
• Any particular reason why Common Sense Media is first? It's the only non-contemporary review, while the rest are from the 80s.

All of this is really FA-level nitpicking. There's nothing here that puts the article below the GACR or is worth holding up promotion over; take these as suggestions for improvement. No concerns with CV, image use (though I wish to god we had an image of a "Pineapple Butterscotch Ding Dang Doo"), and sourcing checked out. Good work! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]