Wikipedia:Peer review/Stage works of Paul Goodman/archive1

Stage works of Paul Goodman

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I stumbled into this article as part of my larger project on Paul Goodman oeuvre, finding that rather than writing a stub about Jonah, I could write a little on each of his major plays.

I'm looking for any feedback in advance of taking this neat little morsel to FAC. czar 14:12, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @
  Czar: This has been open for over a month without a comment. Are you still interested in receiving comments? Z1720 (talk) 19:15, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  @Z1720, yes, thank you. It's a niche topic so I anticipated it sitting for a while. czar 19:27, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Z1720

Comments after a prose read-through:

• Page description is missing
  • It has {{short description|none}} because the title is descriptive of its contents
• "Put another way, the plays each have three characters: a traveler (the audience), a spirit (the idea of the poem), and the chorus (that interprets both for each other)." I think this explanation can be worded better, but I'm not sure how. I don't like the "Put another way" sentence starter.
  • Edited
• I do not think that the names of the plays are supposed to be bolded, as this article is about all of the Stage works, not specific entries. Typically I do not see bolded statements in the body of the article.
  • It's not often needed but it's the common technique for highlighting redirect targets per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Text formatting#Article title terms
• "The sets and invitations were primitive and the 20-person seating arrangements intimate." Was this chosen by Goodman? If so, why? If not, it should be removed.
  • It was a production decision by the Living Theatre
• "Attendees included John Cage, Merce Cunningham, and Carl Van Vechten." I think this is off-topic for the article: the reader does not need to know who came to see the performance unless it is important for its development.
  • They were major figures in the New York scene, so I thought it was useful for context, and Cunningham became a collaborator later in the article, but I can remove if it reads as trivia

• I think it reads as trivia and can be removed. Z1720 (talk) 17:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The last paragraph of "Jonah" falls into the "X said Y" pattern. Consider
  WP:RECEPTION
  for ideas on how to reword this paragraph.
  • I thought it was rather varied, for the material

• There are three sentences in a row that use this format (NYT's review, then Commonweal, then New Yorker) which gave me this impression. Is there a way to combine these reviews by themes instead? Z1720 (talk) 17:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720, not really but I played around with it a bit more. I think that should cover everything. czar 19:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those are my thoughts. Based on prose I think this is almost ready for an FAC. Z1720 (talk) 20:36, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Z1720! Replies above czar 22:30, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Responses above. Z1720 (talk) 17:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720, did you have any further replies or suggestions? czar 13:04, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]