The Litigators has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
October 25, 2011. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that a reviewer for
John Grisham's new novel
The Litigators praised it for avoiding clichés such as somebody being murdered for "stumbling too close to the truth"? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The book was released the day after Walter Isaacson's biography of Steve Jobs entitled Steve Jobs was released by Simon & Schuster. Jobs had died earlier that month and the release date was moved forward. !--Relevant because it impacts the marketability of the book. I.E., it will probably never be a #1 best seller as a hardcover.--
This information isn't relevant unless and until the novel is actually proven incapable of reaching #1 Bestseller status due to being edged out by Steve Jobs. When that happens, a paragraph explaining the effect of the Jobs biography might be relevant - until it does, this paragraph is irrelevant to the article. 69.174.87.20 ( talk) 18:15, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ebe123 ( talk · contribs) 15:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. |
@ Ebe123:, you were right in your initial note in the GA that the plot section is excessively long. Now it is so long and detailed that the reader doesn't have to read the book. @ TonyTheTiger: please cut it down. Three, max four, paragraphs are enough to convey the overall idea. Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 19:30, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
The Litigators has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
October 25, 2011. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that a reviewer for
John Grisham's new novel
The Litigators praised it for avoiding clichés such as somebody being murdered for "stumbling too close to the truth"? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The book was released the day after Walter Isaacson's biography of Steve Jobs entitled Steve Jobs was released by Simon & Schuster. Jobs had died earlier that month and the release date was moved forward. !--Relevant because it impacts the marketability of the book. I.E., it will probably never be a #1 best seller as a hardcover.--
This information isn't relevant unless and until the novel is actually proven incapable of reaching #1 Bestseller status due to being edged out by Steve Jobs. When that happens, a paragraph explaining the effect of the Jobs biography might be relevant - until it does, this paragraph is irrelevant to the article. 69.174.87.20 ( talk) 18:15, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ebe123 ( talk · contribs) 15:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. |
@ Ebe123:, you were right in your initial note in the GA that the plot section is excessively long. Now it is so long and detailed that the reader doesn't have to read the book. @ TonyTheTiger: please cut it down. Three, max four, paragraphs are enough to convey the overall idea. Thanks, Yoninah ( talk) 19:30, 20 July 2019 (UTC)