Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Assessment/RequestArchive

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Documentation

Requesting an assessment

  1. IUPUI
    . I am a new editor in a classroom full of other new editors. Thanks for the assessment. IA0509 18:48, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Archive

Archive of Requesting an assessment

2006

  1. Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea
  2. Boogiepop series
  3. Boogiepop
  4. Nineteen Eighty-Fouralready had one - is it that you disagree with it?!
  5. The Picture of Dorian Gray
  6. The Grapes of Wrath - already had one - project banners go on talk pages.!
  7. Walk Two Moons
  8. Lolita - This is rated as Start-class / Mid-importance. I think it should be B-class / Top-importance (main work of a major author & the word lolita has found its way into the English language, indicating its impact outside the field of literature. I'd like a second opinion before I change it. Agreed!
  9. Errabee 09:34, 13 August 2006 (UTC)If you were the one that exclaimed "project banners go on the talk pages" then you warrented a reprisal, if not, then you did not, but it was clearly not addressed to you. Besides, it wasn't bitter, I didn't mean to offend with "give me a break". Take it easy. UAAC 11:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  10. In Search of Lost Time needs an importance rating. Guermantes 03:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC) I have proposed it to be Top-important; discussion about the importance here[reply]
  11. Dragons of Autumn Twilight- reassessment Added some comments on how to improve.
  12. Dragons of Winter Night
  13. Errabee 15:23, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  14. The Mists of Avalon
  15. The Palm-Wine Drinkard. Currently rated Low. I haven't made any changes, but I think it should be rated at least High and possibly Top. Amos Tutuola is one of the most well known of African authors and one of the first to be critically acclaimed internationally. This book is listed on Harold Bloom's Western Canon. --Ibis3 00:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC) Raised to High, with little in the article it was difficult to assess significance. If this is as importance as you suggest it really needs more of an article than this. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Errabee 00:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  17. Albus Dumbledore
  18. Hermione Granger
  19. Ron Weasley
  20. Severus Snape
  21. Sirius Black
  22. Errabee 15:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  23. The Catcher in the Rye-- First to give a rating... It's definitely top-class given its role in high school literature and cultural significance, but I'm not sure on the quality-rating I've given it. Hurrah 20:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC) Looks fine to me - confirmed. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  24. The Count of Monte Cristo - has been nearly completely rewritten in the last few months, and could use a re-evaluation.
  25. Mortal Engines - spent a bit of time on this. Battle Ape 02:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  26. Dumb Witness - Article considerably expanded. Require quality assessment and I also suggest a Mid article importance --Sordel 21:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Appointment with Death - Article considerably expanded. Require quality assessment and I also suggest a Mid article importance. --Sordel 13:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  28. The Portrait of a Lady - Article did not have a Project box on its talk page, so I added one with ratings High importance and B quality. Please assess properly ... article may be better than B. I believe that Top-importance is appropriate for this novel. --Sordel 15:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Middlemarch - Similarly, added Project box with High/B rating and would like an assessment to validate that holding assessment. I believe that Top-importance is appropriate for this novel. --Sordel 19:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Death Comes as the End - Article considerably expanded. I suggest a Low article importance. --Sordel 07:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Hercule Poirot's Christmas - Article considerably expanded. I suggest a Low article importance. --Sordel 18:16, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Sad Cypress - Article considerably expanded. I suggest a Low article importance.--Sordel 14:34, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Tess of the d'Urbervilles - Added project box with provisional rating of start/top. Would appreciate double check by a more practiced eye. --Sordel 15:02, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  34. And Then There Were None - This page (which I've done nothing to) deserves assessment, but seems to have been the object of bad-tempered edit wars (check the talk page for a laugh). I'd recommend a High importance ... quality could be Start or B if anyone's got a spare five minutes to check. --Sordel 22:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Arthur Hastings - Added substantial section on literary function of this character. Should now be B/Mid I would hope. --Sordel 12:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  36. One, Two, Buckle My Shoe - Big rewrite & expansion. I think it's B/Mid, but would welcome a second opinion. --Sordel 17:41, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  37. 334 - Rewrote & expanded quite a bit, per template. ←Hob 10:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  38. House of Stairs (William Sleator novel) - Major edit, added "Characters" section, cover art and info box. Good enough for "Start" anyway? Applejuicefool 13:46, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  39. Five Little Pigs - Big rewrite, suggest Mid importance --Sordel 17:28, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Norwegian Wood (novel) — (I used sign myself as Tachikoma) I added sections on the characters and a plot summary, and other people have added onto that. There is now an infobox with cover art and other details. I believe that the article is clearly more than a stub. Whether it is a Start class or a B-class article, I can't say. I'm really proud of my work! :)--Kyoko 22:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  41. Ella Minnow Pea - Although I haven't been the one to edit it, somebody (or somebodies) has (have) made significant contributions and it is far beyond the "stub" rating now. It looks good for at least "Start" in my opinion. If someone could look this up and change it, t hat would be great. Hurrah 05:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed - although assessed as B-Class. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:03, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Bloody Jack - Fwee. I started this article last year, and it was really stub-ish, but it's been steadily updated by others, and I template'd it. I'd be grateful if someone would rate it. Sandmouse 22:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  43. The Metamorphosis - short story by Franz Kafka. Large additions to "Plot summary" and "Lost in translation." I intend to add further sections on Freud, Oedipus, and the use of the father- and authority-figure(s) in Metamorphosis and similar stories. LCecere 05:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC) - assessment already done by 128.194.131.86 (talk · contribs) when checked but I agree with it.[reply]
  44. Blindness - by Jose Saramago. I believe that the low importance rating is incorrect, and it should be at the least mid importance - he won the nobel prize, after all. It's one of his more popular novels as well. The article itself does need more work, but that shouldn't affect the rating of the subject. Tigger89 16:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC) - I have adjusted the rating; however there is (at time of writing) nothing in the article to indicate this level of notability. This should be amended if you are are aware for such issues. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 16:53, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  45. A Cool Million - I think the low importance rating is incorrect as this is one of only four novels Nathanael West has written and is identified by Harold Bloom in The Western Canon as a significant book in its commentary on American Culture. Hopefully, I'll have time to expand on it soon. AshcroftIleum 05:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know the work , so I won't adjust it. However what I will say is that the current rating is based on the notability (or lack of it) made clear by reading the article. This is a common (very common) lack with novel articles, nothing is being written in the majority of articles to demonstrate the level of notability of the work. If you could add some more on this (verifiable of course) and then it could be reassessed. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Massive rewrite; infobox and criticism added AshcroftIleum 19:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  46. Draco Malfoy - This article hasn't been rated yet. I'd like someone unfamilair with the Harry Potter series to rate it to prevent possible bias. I'd say a quality rating would be more useful, put an importance assessment is welcome too. John Reaves 05:26, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  47. Ginny Weasley - This article hasn't been rated yet. I'd like someone unfamilair with the Harry Potter series to rate it to prevent possible bias. I'd say a quality rating would be more useful, put an importance assessment is welcome too. Basically, any tips or suggestions are welcome. John Reaves 09:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Hogsmeade - This article hasn't been rated yet. I'd like someone unfamilair with the Harry Potter series to rate it to prevent possible bias. I'd say a quality rating would be more useful, put an importance assessment is welcome too. Basically, any tips or suggestions are welcome. John Reaves 10:05, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  49. The Butterfly Kid - by Chester Anderson. This is my first article for Wikipedia, and although I doubt it's going to win any awards, an assessment would be nice. I won't be able to further expand the article until I find the time to read the book again, and that isn't likely to happen soon. Antepenultimate 21:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Something Wicked This Way Comes (novel) - by Ray Bradbury - Expanded the article considerably, adding a lengthy plot summary, analysis and themes, critical reception, and references in popular culture sections. I would appreciate a quality assessment to know just how much I still need to improve the article; hopefully it's worth at least B-class. An importance assessment would be welcomed too; it's probably somewhere between high and mid importance. Breed Zona 01:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  51. Ilium - by Dan Simmons - Added infobox, plot summary, character bios, definitions of technology and other things included in the novel, and literary allusions. If possible, I would like someone's input who has read the sequel on whether or not some info from the sequel should be included in the article to define some terms and such. I added a section in the Talk article about it. -- Thesis4Eva cont. talk 04:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2007

  1. East of Eden (John Steinbeck) − A considerable amount of content has been added since it was given the Assessment tag. Several editors have contributed, and I believe it now should be ranked as B-class. Compare the version on August 3 (last edit before being tagged) with the version on January 11 (most recent). − Twas Now 10:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 11:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Crystal Mask - by Katherine Roberts - Completed infobox, added Major themes, Allusions/references to other works, Literary criticism, added some content to other sections. Overall added quite alot since last assessment but I don't know how to improve it. Would be nice if someone could reassess it. Comparison between last assessment; 22 December 2006 [1] and now [2] Caladon 12:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Request for several: Dragons of Spring Dawning, Time of the Twins, War of the Twins, Test of the Twins, The Second Generation. All unassessed thus far. DoomsDay349 23:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Don Quixote Substantial editing— moving of text, created attempt at a systematic TOC; added commentary of linguistics in the interest of certain clarifications (e.g., puns of the novel) [with refs. to Real Academia Española;] some 'cit. needed' locs noted. PlasticDoor 22:19, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Clearly already a B-class before you started - this article should go forward for GA (Good Article) review or at least peer review in preparation. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. The Well of Loneliness - I'm not sure how much it really matters, but could someone revisit the importance rating of this newly promoted FA? "Low" was appropriate based on what was in the article when it was first assessed, but it now explains the book's significance outside the field of literature. —Celithemis 23:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed, pushed it up to Mid, others may have a different perspective! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Christ Clone Trilogy - Requesting rating on both quality and importance.
  7. I have made several recent changes (including adding illustrations) to a group of related articles:
    Abbey Girls, Abbey Connectors and Oxenham Non-Connectors - as well as to the biblio-biographical article Elsie J. Oxenham and I would be grateful for rating/feedback please on any or all. Thanks --Abbeybufo 14:21, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  8. The Ascendants of Estorea
     (James Barclay) - Much of the previous issues have been fixed, please rate the page again and then the article can continue to develop.
    Can't see that the article has developed that much or that notablity has been proven to be that great yet. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. The Other Side Of The Hedge (E.M. Forster) - The article has been completely changed. I believe it should now be ranked again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Travel38 (talk • contribs
    )
    Upped the importance slightly based on author's importance, however otherwise left alone. Comments with article. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. The Mysterious Benedict Society by Trenton Lee Stewart. The article has really grown since it was first made.Codelyoko194 14:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    given an assesment, but the article primarily needs to assert notability and be more selective in content. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Cyborg (novel) - I didn't make any changes but did run across it when looking it up to decide whether or not to buy a copy of the book that I found cheap. I found it thorough and useful and well-written. Really, I think it's thorough enough and well-written enough to warrant a (it's currently only Start class) B-class; with a few cites, I think it could easily be a GA. - User:Runa27 not logged in 169.139.190.6
    No change to assessment made, but reasoning added to the "comments" with the assessment. Basically it is good, but to be a "B" of certainly a "GA" it would need a lot more. see comments with novel. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. The Death of Artemio Cruz by Carlos Fuentes. I think it deserves a higher importance rating. It is a book written by a very famous author read in high schools and colleges across the US and the world ; it is a staple of Latin American literature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.169.28.126 (talk • contribs)
    However there isn't even anything in the article to show it as notable enough for wikipedia inclusion. This needs plenty of work first. Also "across the countries by a very famous author" doesn't make grammatical sense, what is the extent of the influence being asserted. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 17:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    note above original comment changed so my questions seem now very out of context, but I've left them as I made them, please see back a step or two in history for the original of the user comments. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Country, written by a famous author, just a little slip up. I thought the importance factor was how important the book was, not the article. Basically I think the article needs to be expanded a lot so it is on par with, say, the One Hundred Years of Solitude article. Sorry if this is the wrong way to request that, I don't understand any of this wiki-bureaucracy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.162.40.183 (talk • contribs)
  13. The Famous Five (characters) does not seem to be of 'high' importance; I suggest reviewing it for a potential lowering in importance since neither the author nor the series has much cultural currency today.128.59.43.48 21:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Reviewed but left "High", reason given with article. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. James Barclay Surely this is in a more formal tone now, and if not, please explain where to improve the article.Monty2002 16:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Not for us to say - it's not in scope - I added a WPBiography tag and left it alone. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. As I Walked Out One Midsummer Morning by Laurie Lee is a classic travel novel of its era (1930s). It contains beautiful descriptions of the author's journey on foot from his home in Slad, Gloucestershire via London to the southern coast of Spain just before the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War.Ivankinsman 19:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Skeleton Coast (novel) - recent AfC. needs a look at. Thanks xC | ☎ 20:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Enhanced and assessed. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Boomsday - by Christopher Buckley. I know it's nothing special but I thought I should get a rating after all. Just to get started.
  18. A Series of Unfortunate Events - been left B-Class for a while, even though it's been significantly improved. Also, as a quite notable series, do you think High might be better than Mid? Mrmoocow 02:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I have upped the importance / priority as you suggested. However for the "quality" class to progress you need to the article reviewed by a number of editors. We do not "yet" have the structure to cope with "A-Class" review and I notice you have had this article through 2 peer-reviews and on failed FA review. What I would suggest is maybe another peer-review and then a GA submission or you could just go direct to the GA submission if you are confident. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  19. The Runaway Jury - I have just made some very large changes to the page since its original rating. I would like to have it looked at again.
    Improvements have been made warrenting taking this up to "Start". Still in need of more notability material and critical and other reaction, etc :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  20. SkierRMH 19:42, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    This has been revised to "Start" as some more work has been done on the referencing. However as an article on the novel it is still lacking. This maybe more to do confusion on the purpose of the article, or at least it's naming. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:27, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  21. The Girl at the Lion d'Or - I want closure on this one. There's more to add but I don't think it's a stub class article anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrick Roeley (talk • contribs)
    I would easily have assigned this as B-class if there were any referencing and in-line citations. This is otherwise a good article and referencing is the next thing which should be added (any help needed - please ask) :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Eragon - I doubt this is beyond B-Class, but I'm having doubts over whether of not its current rating of "High" is justified. UnaLaguna 06:05, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed - I downed that rating to High from Top, but yes on second thoughts it has been made into film but I'm not sure the novel is yet that significant. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Skeleton Key (novel) - I don't think it really deserves much of what it has (Start and Mid). The only information the article has is the complete storyline. The article has no spoiler warning, and I think it should be demoted to Low, and either kept at Start or demoted to Stub. Your choice. Powerfulmind pleasetalktome! lookatallofmyedits! 23:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed - :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Eagle Strike - I believe that this article has enough information to be upgraded to Start-class. Powerfulmind pleasetalktome! lookatallofmyedits! 23:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Apart from a tighter Plot summary the information is about the same as "Skeleton" above - rated the same - sorry :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Bella 18:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Rated "stub" purely as there is there are no in-line citations or referencing. Otherwise a promising article. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  26. me_and 12:00, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I agree, but I guess you are likely to enhance this soon by what you say. As it is so new the importance is unlikely that change anytime soon. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Bella 22:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Of low importance unless more notability information becomes available, also it could easily warrent and "Start" rating if there were some citations or referencing. 08:05, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
  28. Bel Canto (novel) - I added some new information and citation. I don't think its a stub anymore.
    By the addition of some references this does become a Start-class. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 11:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Every article in the
    ~Bella 14:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    They do, not sure about the manga though. All done. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 11:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  30. The Alchemist (novel) - I made a lot of changes, and think the article should be upgraded to B-Class...BACK AT IT AGAIN If not good enough, tell me what to improve!!!!--Desert storm101 05:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)Desert Storm101[reply]
    disagree! there are no references other than the self-reference, no inline citations and the "notable quotation" is too long and no reasoning given for it's inclusion. Remove or trim this and give more sources and then yes it would be "B". :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 11:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, it is now referenced enough to go up to B-Class. I have however added a couple of in-line citation forms to the notable quotes, which ideally should be given page numbers so readers can find them and verify them. Then these should be added in like for to the other passages. Also the quotes should have more surrounding prose to talk about them not just include them in isolation, it is better but could go further. Nice work though! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:59, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  31. Bel Canto (novel) - I did a lot more work on this article, and I think it should be a B-class article. I am trying to get this article to GA status, so any and all comments are appreciated.Z1720 05:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    agreed! this has been improved and deserves to be regraded. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 11:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  32. Hogwarts - I made quite a few changes to it, and tightened it up. Is good? User:Gingersnap Cookies
    I don't think it yet needs to go above "B". I personally agree with the tag that talks about separating fact and fiction and also it could do with more referencing and verifiable comment. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  33. The Book of the Short Sun - I expanded this from a stub a while ago; perhaps we could lose the "stub-class" rating? --Jere7my 07:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    It does seem a decent article apart from two observations. First it has no referencing or verifiability at all and second it is largely "in-universe" in style of writing. At very least the "Lead" should be written from a dispassionate and "out of universe" real world manner that makes some attempt to assert notability. I will add myself a referencing section at the end for you to make use of. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Swan(Talk!) 15:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Thank you very much!  
    Swan(Talk!) 17:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  35. First Among Sequels - much expanded from original stub; not sure if it should be start or B class, as it still needs a fair bit of work, but it's getting closer. Hints on further improvements would be appreciated too. Cheers. Carre 10:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    seems clearly a "B" to me - so changed. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  36. The Midwife's Apprentice -- expanded somewhat, but as I'm quite a novice on Wikipedia I only expanded the plot summary. It still needs work, but if anybody would like to help I would be most grateful!
    Can't see that it needs a change of assessment though. There is not much here beyong a plot summary. More out of universe, reviews, comment, reaction etc etc. needed. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Swan(Talk!) 13:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Ok, I have rated - Stub as there is little here so far. I would also think that the series article and the first title article should be clearly distinguished at some point. The series being named "Time Travelers Quartet" to distinguish from the first novel. What do you think. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 14:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  38. Bee Season - I have re-written the plot summary and added reviews and nominations. Scolaire 16:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I have made a few slight stylistic changes and then given it a B-class rating. It pushing it a bit - but it could do with more. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 17:07, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Fugitive Pieces -- this article has been expanded greatly since it got its original stub rating. Forseti11 21:54, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I have actually upped the priority / importance rating based on the award and the fact it is being made into film. However there is still very little to the article, although it has grown as you say. Where it desperately needs help is with
    WP:NOTE statements. Also general referencing, footnotes, reviews, critical reaction, commercial reaction are all things that could be added. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:51, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  40. Underworld (DeLillo novel) - This article currently has a stub rating but I just added quite a bit of content. - Skinny McGee 16:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    clearly much improved. moved up the importance on notability factors too. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Gaia (Foundation universe) - This article hasn't been assessed yet. Slartibartfast (1992) 18:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Borderline between stub and start. Used start as there is little more to add. Should however be referenced. Look a bit too original research at present. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:55, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Gaia (Foundation universe) - I've done some work on this article since the review about a week ago (I know it seems like little time, but the article has changed quite a bit). I added references and reorganized the article, also added the standard infobox for that sort of articles (fictional planets). Slartibartfast (1992) 22:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Still very in-universe and in need of third part references - but otherwise looking ok. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Soul Circus - I have just started this article and wonder if someone could assess it. I have never written about a novel for wikipedia before so any advice would be welcome.--Opark 77 13:34, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Bit early only 4 years old to give more than a Low for importance / priority, however the article is looking generally good so B. Good breadth of material. Always good to have more reaction, review, awards, referencing etc. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:41, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The Girl at the Lion d'Or - There's no real body of criticism on the novel so I cited a book review. Also expanded the quotes and gave page numbers. Sorry, can't locate 1st edition cover. Patrick Roeley 20:31 24 September 2007.
    Nice article, as you say probably about as much as we can expect for this title. If you come across more, do add it. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Trantor - This article hasn't been rated yet. --Slartibartfast (1992) 02:50, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    It's been done. --Slarti (1992) 22:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I upped that class slightly due to the quality of the writing, although the article could clearly do with sxome referencing and / or in-line citations. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Blade of Tyshalle - I know it's probably only at start-class, but I'd just appreciate someone else agreeing with me on it, since it currently ranks as stub. Howa0082 22:18, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Just about "Start" - however it could now do with something on commercial and critical reaction. And more need for referencing. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. "Hills Like White Elephants" (Ernest Hemingway). Complete revision of the original stub, incorporating as much of the original material as possible. Citations from six peer-reviewed sources. Any input/new ratings appreciated. It may be only a start, but I don't think it's just a stub anymore. Thanks for your time! Cantseetheforest 18:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Easily "Start" - I actually thought a bit about a "B" however it could now do with something on commercial and critical reaction and referencing for any such material. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Friday's Child (novel) (Georgette Heyer). Restored deletions from original plot summary, which seems to me all that's necessary (see Talk). Any input/new ratings appreciated.
    I have upped the class to "Start", however it does need more statements of notability, review critical comment or acclaim, 3rd party referencing etc. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Eldest. I beleive it should be reassessed, it is now B-class but it might possibly qualify as GA-class or higher/lower.--Sunny910910 (talk|Contributions) 04:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    You may well be right but the article should then properly go through GA article review. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. The Year of the Jackpot (Robert A. Heinlein). I haven't made changes to this, but it appears to me to have been significantly extended in October 2006; I think stub-class is selling it short. It should be start-class. Rpresser (talk) 16:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I have pushed the rating up to Start. However the footnoting is still very basic. A Reference section should be added with more to satisfy
    WP:NOTABILITY. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  11. Montmorency Series
     unassessed and went through some editing
    I have initially set this as a Stub although there is quite a bit to the article - maily didn't put in on as "Start" as there is no referencing to allow
    WP:Notable :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 14:39, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  12. The Book Thief previously a stub, went through some revision and extension to improve the summary and other sections.
    Just scrapes a "Start" but with only the one citation. Could do with more referencing and notability material. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 14:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Les Bienveillantes previously a stub, started with removing some howlers and then went along to do what I hope is useful to non-French readers, at least until the English translation of this important book is out next year. --Joel Mc (talk) 14:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Rated as B-class due to the general quality, notability and referencing already apparent in the article. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 17:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2008

  1. Nothing Like It in the World hasn't been assessed yet. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 16:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Not that surprising - due to the fact it is outside our project scope. Try WP:Books :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Private (novel series). Perhaps beyond Start-Class at this point. It's had some notable expasnions made to various areas, but admittedly, the Character section is bogged down in plot summary, hence the tag. --James26 (talk) 05:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Pushed up to "B", however it would need more "out of universe" material to get much further. It is good to se some inline citations. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. WP:MOS, plus added the infobox. I am wondering what would the state of the article be judged as (for other contributors' reference in improving the article). Jappalang (talk) 08:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Clearly a "B-class" article. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:17, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Naked Lunch Done some massive overhauls on this recently, would like some guidance on getting it to GA status. 80.5.158.244 (talk) 20:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    assessment currently seems about right. If you want to get further article advise take the subject to Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Peer review. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Cities of the Red Night Is this still a stub?? 80.5.158.244 (talk) 20:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I would say yes the article is largely not a great deal beyond a self descriptive piece. There are no references or in-line citations, or anything else to support
    WP:OR. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  6. Earth Abides I have made a a lot of additions/revisions to this article and could use some pointers to get it to GA status. Is it ready for B status now? I am working on the Criticism of the book section, but am done with most other sections. Jacqke (talk) 23:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I have upped the clasification to "B" which is at very least. Also I have restructured the article to bring it more in line with the
    WP:NOVELS
    article pattern. If anything the article might need trimming a little if it is to progress further - particularly the Plot summary is a little on the long side and some of what was under the analysis section is tending toward OR. However generally this is showing great signs of promise and is much improved from previously. 11:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
  7. Celia en el colegio, shortly after I began the article it was rated as a stub. I have added significant information to it since, though it so far lacks sources. I managed to add important things such as the first-edition cover. T.W. (talk) 13:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Much improved - upped to "Start" - and yes references would be the next logical thing. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Tales from Watership Down (Richard Adams) — I've done some work on this article recently, and I think it's at least a Start class article, if not even B class. There is one section tagged with Original research, but it will be removed soon if no references are found. Mr. Absurd (talk) 18:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes at least start. To move forward I would recommend you look at the wikipeida:WikiProject Novels/ArticleTemplate and also change out the "editions" to a "publication details" section. Also mention of what is "in print" is bit "advert" in character. Try to focus on the work itself and any more you can find on the real world reaction to it. Any more in-line citations and references would be good too. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. The Forests of Silence — I've worked on this article recently, and I think it's at least a Start class article. I've added Characters, See Also, and External Links Sections, and shortened the plot. O—— The Unknown Hitchhiker 05:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Start class. You could possibly add a few more characters to the list, but otherwise looking great. AlmightyClam 16:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. The Lake of Tears — I've worked on this article very recently, and I think it's at least a Start class article. I've added Characters, See Also, and External Links Sections, and redid the plot. Basically what I have done to the Forests of Silence, but I also "wikified" it so it's neater. O—— The Unknown Hitchhiker 05:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    'Tis Start, but I also tagged the article with "tone" and "in-universe". The article over-uses the word "evil" which is probably unsuitable for Wikipedia (in that type of article), and mentions several aspects of the book which someone who hadn't read the book may not understand. AlmightyClam 16:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. City of the Rats — I've worked on this article recently, by recreating it from a ReDirect to an article. I've added its Characters, See Also, and External Links Sections, and wrote a plot based on the previous one. It's basically what I've done with the last few articles. O—— The Unknown Hitchhiker 05:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, but I kept this article's rating "stub". The unsuitible tone and in-universe style are enormous here, and it needs a lot of cleanup. Will get round to having a look at the rest of your requests soon. AlmightyClam 16:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. The Shifting Sands — I'm on a roll! Worked on this article just recently, by recreating it from a ReDirect to an article. I've added its Characters, See Also, and External Links Sections, and wrote a plot based on the previous one. It's basically what I've done with the last few articles above. O—— The Unknown Hitchhiker 05:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    This is still a Start article as of now, but it's growing nicely. It has quite a bit of in-universe information (plot, characters), but it is missing key information (reception, publication history) and references. You may want to look at the novel article template for some ideas of what to research for and add. María (habla conmigo) 21:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Return to Del — Still going on. I've added its Characters, See Also, and External Links Sections to it. O—— The Unknown Hitchhiker 01:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Same as above; now Start class. María (habla conmigo) 21:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Celia en el mundo, new article. T.W. (talk) 19:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Lack of references and needs substantial clean-up, but a very good Start -- literally. :) Add some refs, some more info (especially on it being a Spanish lit. classic), and you'll have a B. María (habla conmigo) 21:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. War of the Spider Queen - added intro, author info, summaries, character listings, all the references, an infobox, and a few external links. Should be a good start at least.Dark Squall (talk) 05:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Nice work! Formatting issues and some questionable sources (see
    WP:V) aside, this is an improvement. Definitely B-class. María (habla conmigo) 12:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  16. 'Skins! 21:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Assessed as Stub/Low. There is no information at Grey Griffins Books that establishes the series' importance as a whole, and I cannot find much online regarding its impact. Could be Mid importance in time; note that this is also a future book. María (habla conmigo) 21:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  17. 'Skins! 23:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Same as above: Stub/Low. Lack of references and out-of-universe information. María (habla conmigo) 01:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. The Nemesis of Faith New Article Dozenthey (talk) 01:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    A very respectable B article of Mid importance. I made some minor formatting fixes. María (habla conmigo) 02:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  19. 'Skins! 22:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Assessed as Stub/Low; no references or assertion of notability/importance. María (habla conmigo) 01:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  20. City of the Beasts by Isabel Allende. I completely redid the plot, added characters, etc., etc. It should be higher than a start-class now. Bkwrmgrl1 (talk) 16:47, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    The assessment has not changed: Start/Mid. The article contains no references and almost no out-of-universe information, both of which are necessary. There are also clean-up tags and an empty section ("Themes & Issues"). You may find
    reliable sources to cite your material. María (habla conmigo) 17:05, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  21. Loss and Gain New Article. I might add additional references next time I get to the library. Dozenthey (talk) 02:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    A very promising B/Mid. María (habla conmigo) 12:18, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  22. History of Crime Fiction Not mine, but I noticed that it was unrated, but very important to the crime task force. Juru (talk) 04:38, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Good catch! Assessed as B/Mid for the Novels WP overall, but kept the Top importance for the task force. María (habla conmigo) 12:18, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Children of God (novel) Am new, made a few additions to this article, wondered if it deserves start class. --Captain-tucker (talk) 01:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Definitely Start class, relatively close to becoming a B. María (habla conmigo) 12:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  24. The Secret Agent Have worked extensively on this article for a short period. I am intending to bring it up to Good article soon, but wish to know if I was on the right lines. Think it's due a re-assessment?--Adasta 16:49, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Definitely due; have assessed it as B-class and also added crime task force. María (habla conmigo) 18:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Bows Against the Barons - Expanded with additional material and references. Would like a re-assessment? --DanDs (talk) 13:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    The lead needs expansion per
    WP:LEAD, but it fulfills most important areas. Reassessed as B-class. María (habla conmigo) 13:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  26. talk) 13:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    There are currently no inline citations, so I do not feel it's ready for B-class yet. Assessed as Start-class and left a note on the talk page regarding perhaps splitting the article in two. María (habla conmigo) 13:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  27. A Meeting at Corvallis -- I haven't done much work on it, but I noticed that it has changed significantly since January 18 when it was rated. -- Imperator3733 (talk) 21:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Lack of references, but more info than an average Stub; re-assessed as Start/Low. María (habla conmigo) 13:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  28. The Protector's War -- Has also had a lot of work done and was only automatically rated. -- Imperator3733 (talk) 21:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Same as above: Start/Low, needs references. María (habla conmigo) 13:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Why Didn't They Ask Evans? -- many changes made since last rated.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 22:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Updated to B/Mid, although it still needs work, especially on that bloated plot section! María (habla conmigo) 13:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  30. talk) 15:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Still a Stub; there is only one section of substance and much information is missing. María (habla conmigo) 13:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  31. talk) 15:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    As above. :) María (habla conmigo) 13:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  32. The Host -- I've been working on this one, and I think it's no longer a stub. I know it still has work to do, but I wanted a reassessment just to get an idea of where to head with it next. Thanks! DreamHaze (talk) 22:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    This is mostly a plot summary so far, so reassessed at Start. I would recommend including more info on the latter sections when it becomes available; critical reviews? Also remember to format the refs per
    WP:CITE! María (habla conmigo) 19:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  33. The Raw Shark Texts - For some reason, this is considered a stub, which it is clearly not. I guess the person who made changes last never got a reassessment, and I feel it should get one.
    Upped to Start-class. Very little out of universe info and only one reference. María (habla conmigo) 19:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  34. Nightmare Academy (novel) -- I've created this page about a book with the same title (obviously). I've wrote loads of information into it, and other people have helped along the way. So, I'd be honored to have it assessed. O—— The Unknown Hitchhiker 21:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Now Start-class, but needs information other than in-universe; reception, sales, more details on the film adaptation, etc. María (habla conmigo) 15:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  35. City of the Rats - This one had been reassessed before, and I've got rid of all the things that the assessor didn't like about it. Or at least I think I did. I'd like for it to be assessed, too. O—— The Unknown Hitchhiker 01:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Start-class, same as above. María (habla conmigo) 15:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Suffer the Little Children - a short story by Stephen King. Added a characters section, made a more direct plot section, and redid the lead. Please give constructive criticism. --MwNNrules (talk) 02:57, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    This is really still a stub-class, I'm afraid. Everything here is only in-universe and the only reference is the book itself. Because it's a short story, it may be difficult to find
    reliable, third party sources to flesh out the article with details pertaining to critical reception, etc, but any sort of outside-universe info is pertinent. The citations are also very redundant; cite the book publishing info once and then only refer to the author and page number (example: <ref>King, p. 81</ref>).María (habla conmigo) 15:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  37. The Valley of the Lost - I finally added the plot, so I'd like it to be reassessed. O—— The Unknown Hitchhiker 15:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  38. The Maze of the Beast - I added the plot for this, too, so I'd also like it to be reassessed. O—— The Unknown Hitchhiker 15:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Both have already been reassessed as Start. María (habla conmigo) 14:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  39. A Tale of Two Cities - there is much more to do, but I think this article has been improved substantially. I'm hoping it's reached GA status. DiderotWasRight (talk) 03:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    GA-status cannot be obtained through a reassessment; it must be nominated at
    WP:GAC and undergo a review. María (habla conmigo) 12:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  40. The Sword of Shannara - Plenty of info and a good number of references. the_ed17 04:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    B is the highest rating an article can achieve through reassessment; GA, A and FA all require review. Looking good, though! María (habla conmigo) 12:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Alright, thank you! the_ed17 17:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  41. "Suffer the Little Children" - it wasn't too long ago that I tried to get this re-assessed to start, and it was denied, but I have since learned a bit about adding references, and have even found a reliable third-party source. Once again, please add constructive criticism (it really helped last time!).
    Reassessed as Start and left comments on the talk page. :) María (habla conmigo) 17:11, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  42. Jaz Parks series—Brand new article. I'd be appreciative of classification. Thanks. --James26 (talk) 09:40, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Assessed as "C", although very close to "B" in my opinion. María (habla conmigo) 14:25, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  43. "Luck in the Shadows" - this WAS a stub. It's not an overly well-known fantasy but I've included what relevant sources I could find, rewrote the summary & added additional sections. Thanks! Cadence3 (talk) 02:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Reassessed as "C", it's off to a good start. María (habla conmigo) 19:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! However, Luck in the Shadows is basically complete :) I scrounged up what reliable sources I could (some of them were fairly short, or referred to the series in general rather than this specific novel). This book wasn't well-publicized and if I were to expand it further I feel it would be straying into original research. In light of this I'd appreciate a reassessment, as C would suggest it's missing info or lacking citations. Cadence3 (talk) 20:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Anyone is free to assess an article; this page is for those who are not aware of the particulars. María (habla conmigo) 20:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Homosexuality in speculative fiction. Major expansion of lead, literature, comics and other media sections, list completely referenced, see also/external links tidied, all images free or have fair use updated. Only the modern literature to work on and more on Joanna Russ/Tiptree imo, as needs context. Not a specific novel, i know, but mostly talking about novels. C or B? DankeYobmod (talk) 14:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Already assessed as "B". María (habla conmigo) 18:35, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! B class got added during ratings from other projects (?), but if it wasn't reduced, i guess that endorses it :-).Yobmod (talk) 09:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Word of Honor (1985 novel). I expanded the introduction, the list of characters, the plot, and the critical comments. So this may not be a stub anymore. I will soon post a picture of the original hardcover later today and divide the plot into parts. Also, I'm not for sure about this novel being of low importance in literature: it was written in 1985 and has seemingly gained more importance as the year's go by. Thanks Infinity529 (talk) 18:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Reassessed as "Start", as it still needs quite a bit of work. María (habla conmigo) 18:46, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the quick reply, for adding italics to all books and magazines, and for fixing errors as well. I do have a question that you may be able to answer. I found a picture of the original hardcover but am unsure if I can post it to this site. The picture is at http://www.syndetics.com/index.aspx?type=xw12&isbn=044651280X/LC.GIF&client=lafayp. Syndetics is a company that gives cover art to libraries. I found the picture at a library's catalog. Can it be used or not? Thanks.
    Replied at user's talk page. :) María (habla conmigo) 19:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. A Retrieved Reformation I know this story from school, and was surprised that it didn't have an article. I'm listing it here, because I wonder whether there's a reason. Did O. Henry maybe write too many short stories? Is there a list somewhere that it should be merged into? --Slashme (talk) 09:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    This page is for those seeking help regarding class and priority ratings... perhaps you meant to post these queries at the forum? Either way the article has been assessed as a stub of low importance for now. María (habla conmigo) 12:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, I wanted assessment of the importance of the article together with its notability. If you thought there was some reason why it shouldn't be on WP, I suppose you would have said so ;-) Thanks, anyway!--Slashme (talk) 12:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. The Third Policeman I found this article in a very sorry state and have done my best to clean it up a bit. Am just curious to know if it now rates any higher than Start. Thanks. Lexo (talk) 12:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Reassessed as "C". María (habla conmigo) 14:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The Concrete Blonde I started reading this book a week or so ago and found that it was a stub with just a two sentence plot summary so I have added some details and would like to get an idea where it would now be assessed. Thanks --Captain-tucker (talk) 14:35, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Reassessed as "Start". María (habla conmigo) 14:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. At Swim-Two-Birds I have revised this article consierably; am curious to know how it rates now. Thanks. Lexo (talk) 11:30, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Reassessed as "B"; may be ready for GAC in the near futur! María (habla conmigo) 13:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I appreciate the encouragement. It would be nice if somebody else had a go at improving it, seeing as I don't even like the book very much...(!) Lexo (talk) 14:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. At Swim-Two-Birds Hi - sorry to be so persistent, but I've made some more of what I hope are improvements, and am wondering if it's worth my while submitting this for GAC status. Thanks - Lexo (talk) 23:39, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    A PR may be helpful in this regard. This page is generally only for ratings. María (habla conmigo) 18:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Rider at the Gate I expanded this from a redirect last year but it seems to have slipped through the assessment net. Thanks --Bruce1eetalk 12:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Assessed as Start/Low. María (habla conmigo) 18:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Cloud's Rider As above, I expanded this from a redirect last year. Thanks --Bruce1eetalk 13:02, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Assessed as Start/Low. María (habla conmigo) 18:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The Marriages Between Zones Three, Four and Five I expanded this last week and suggest a "Mid-importance" rating to match the preceding book in this series. Thanks --Bruce1eetalk 10:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Reassessed as C/Mid. María (habla conmigo) 18:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, and for the two above. --Bruce1eetalk 09:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Look Homeward, Angel, this was recently wikinovels collaboration of the month, and I, primarily, made 79 edits to it. I think it deserves to be moved up a few spots from stub-class, and it is very highly sourced.--Robert Waalk (talk) 00:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Although no longer a stub simply because of length, this article is (at the moment) no more than start-class. For one, bookrags.com does not constitute a reliable source per
    WP:RS and that is unfortunately the predominate reference. María (habla conmigo) 00:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  6. American Empire: Blood and Iron - I am working on a personal project adding reviews and references to sf stubs and just want to get a better line between stub/start. Could you give me a quick assessment on these three stubs. Thanks--Captain-tucker (talk) 11:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  7. The Dangerous Days of Daniel X
  8. Eifelheim (novel)
    I would give each a Start class although they could do with a bit more in each case. The last has a title needed in one of the references. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 12:37, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  9. The Sirian Experiments - I expanded this from a stub and suggest a "Mid-importance" rating to match the preceding books in this series. Thanks --Bruce1eetalk 10:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  10. The Making of the Representative for Planet 8 - I expanded this from a stub. Thanks --Bruce1eetalk 10:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Both much improved. So raise to C-class. Could you just check that the infobox reflects the 1st editions and whether or not they are US or UK first editions. They currently imply that the US was the first edition. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 12:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for that. The infobox covers for this series are all US first editions, and from what I can establish (but please correct me if I'm wrong), all the books in this series were published in the US first and then the UK. --Bruce1eetalk 13:45, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Romance novel -Malkinann (talk) 01:40, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Now quite a substancial article rated «B/High». Great work, very comprehensive. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 06:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Scenes of Clerical Life - There's more work to do on this, but I'd like to have an indication of how I'm getting on. El Staplador (talk) 10:47, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Looking good so far (C-Class assuming you have more stories to go) - nice to see referening being used. Keep going that way you are - more stories I assume. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 11:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    There actually are just the three stories. I've tried to make that more clear in the article. I would ask whether that would have made a difference to the rating, but I've done a fair bit of work since then, so I'll hold off until I've expanded the plot summaries to my satisfaction, and then resubmit. Thank you! El Staplador (talk) 14:48, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Der Steppenwolf -Robert Waalk (talk) 21 October 2008 (UTC) Hi, well, this was obviously WikiNovels Collaboration of the Month from September 21, 2008 to October 21, 2008. 77 total edits were, much information was added, new sources were added, as were new sections. Significant improvement was made, including to the information in it. It's still labeled at start class, so it probably deserves a reevaluation.--Robert Waalk (talk) 19:55, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Raised to C—major characters section is awfully short, and there are only 3 inline citations... —Ed 17 for President Vote for Ed 20:11, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Fat Chance (Lesléa Newman novel) - Just created it today, hope it's okay! Limetolime Talk to me • look what I did! 01:44, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    C/mid. Its a little short, and the references are all from her site...a couple third-party refs and this'll be an easy B. Cheers! —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 03:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed it up for B-class; got no reply from the ed17. Limetolime Talk to me • look what I did! 17:06, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    C/mid. Not sure it is really up to B-class. There needs to be more out of universe and critical comment. Borderline but it's my view. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 19:11, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I would agree it needs a fair bit more to get to B class. I put the full citations to the Publishers Weekly and Booklist reviews along with citations to a couple other reliable source reviews on the articles talk page, FYI. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:22, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Scenes of Clerical Life again - I've expanded it substantially and organised the references better, as suggested by various people. Having looked at the criteria, I'd put this as a B-class, but obviously I'm biased ;-) (BTW, apologies if I've resubmitted incorrectly. I wasn't sure whether to add a new article to the list or to continue under the discussion above.) El Staplador (talk) 12:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    This is just fine - I have no qualmes about rating this a B-class article now - it is much improved. Probably with puting it through GA review as a next step. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:42, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Red Scarf Girl by Ji Li Jiang needs a assessment.Vjingo (talk) 20:46, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Non-fiction book, so stubbified for
    WP:BOOKS. —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 21:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  17. talk) 07:58, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I think this one goes straight in as a C-Class article - not sure about the length of the Plot introduction, where there is nothing by way of Plot summary however the only other thing would be to look at the format of the "Publishing history" section. The individual details would be ideally in the format in the pattern. Extremely good start to miss stub or start classes in one bound though. Oh yes a References section for general sources - I know the article well cited but for overall purposes. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:22, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  18. The Sentimental Agents in the Volyen Empire - Expanded from a stub. Thanks --Bruce1eetalk 09:58, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Reassessed as C-class. Could use a "Major themes" section and some elaboration on the characters, as well as a separate "Citations" section for the in-line references. Also, there's no need to quote the novel itself as a reference in the "Plot summary": we trust that your summary of the plot is accurate. All in all, nice work. – Liveste (talk • edits) 00:44, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the assessment, and for the pointers; I'll have a look at them. --Bruce1eetalk 05:40, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2009

  1. Septimus Heap - expanded majorly from stub and includes real world scenarios, future prospects and all types of criticism. "Legolas" (talk) 08:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    On a quick look through it appear much improved, good work all involved. Next step I believe is now a submission for GA - status. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  2. The Kine Saga : I started this a few weeks ago. Obviously it still needs a fair amount of work, including finishing the synopsis, but having worked hard, I'd like a bit of input. I seem to be the only person who has ever read Kine. XD Zekiw (talk) 05:16, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Start. Watch for
    in-universeness. Also, the "characters" section should be its own article, maybe Characters in the Kine Saga, and then just put the main characters in this articles with a single {{main}} tag at the top of the section. Cheers. —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 05:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I would sort of disagree - these character do belong in the series article unless they are of considerable note and deserve a significant amount of prose. Personally I would trim this amount of coverage of character and concentrate as the_ed17 suggest on working up more "real world" material, reviews, impact, awards, reception critical comment etc. At the moment there is also notion to establish notability of any of the material. If fact deletionists would have a field day here. I don't want to sound too discouraging but I have seen so many work hard on material that is worth keeping and lose it dues to writing purely as "fans" without dues attention to wikipedia policies. Good start but focus on arguing the case
    verifiably for this trilogy. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  3. The Goblin Mirror – expanded from a stub. Thanks. --Bruce1eetalk 08:22, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Pushed up to "Start". As with the novel above for
    in-universeness. Think about, reception, reviews, notability, awards or nominations etc. i.e. real world issues. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 10:03, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Thank you. I'll have a look at "real world issues". --Bruce1eetalk 10:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Moonrise (Warriors): Currently listed as a GA. It's reception section is nearly entirely unreferenced, save for a sentence. It's prose is off, and before it contained an unreferenced triva section (I just removed it). I'm wondering if I should just delist it, as I doubt would even stand a chance at a GA reassessment, or if I should go ahead with a GAR anyway. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 01:40, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I'd take it to GAR. Compare that with a GA that I worked on, The Sword of Shannara! Maybe that is a bad comparison, considering that I have tried to take that through FAC twice, but... —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 18:36, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I would say it is just a B-class. There is a little more real world material than a lot of novel related articles and a nice amount of referencing and in-line citations; however not much else. This should never have passed GA in my view. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 12:22, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Torikaebaya Monogatari Joint project article within 4 projects scope. Your project assessed it as a start while it did have RS references to back it. Please either re-assess or give some more detailed motivation on your choice as the main editors for this article are from the Manga/Anime and LGBT project and may not know the inner tropes of your project. Thanks --KrebMarkt 21:12, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed the WikiProject tag, as the article is not about a novel, but a story that has been published in book form. In the future, you should ask the user who added the tag for their rationale, although I must say that it looks like they merely matched the assessment to the rest of the Projects listed. María (habla conmigo) 21:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, i will do it next time. About the rating, Manga/Anime alone and probably LGBT would have put it to C but preferred to wait for the rating given a by more literature oriented project. --KrebMarkt 21:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I've reassessed the article as C-class, for which it clearly qualifies, and placed it under {{
    WPLIT}} until the "novel" (or book) status can be clarified. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 23:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]

His Family -- it was a stub before, but I think it should be higher now. This is my first novel article in years, though, so I'm not sure. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 05:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  1. It was reassessed as C here by
    majestic titan)
  2. Maniac Magee -- Started as a stub. I rewrote the summary and added on sections for major characters, critical reviews, use in education, etc. Added references. maniacmagee (talk) 10:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks like it was rerated here on 26 August. Great work on the article; it was a fun read! I haven't read that novel in years... —
    majestic titan) 19:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  3. The Man Who Fell in Love with the Moon - Major expansion, with inline cites and so on. Personally, I feel it's borderline C/B, but ranked it C temporarily. Less biased eyes than mine may make this decision about moving (or not) to B-class. - Tim1965 (talk) 01:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Assessed as B; good job! —
    majestic titan) 19:28, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  4. Osiris Rising - I think this is probably closing in on C class, but I would like to know what someone else thinks.(It may be a start, but I think I have sourced everything that can be sourced and it covers all of the scholarship.SADADS (talk) 18:58, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Yup, it's C. Needs a plot summary and (if you can) more on the reception. Not sure why parts of the reception are indented? —
    majestic titan) 19:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  5. The Gathering Storm (novel) - Still a some work to do, but, B class? Rehevkor ✉ 23:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, definitely B-class. Good work. —
    majestic titan) 19:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  6. The Faerie Wars Chronicles - real world info added. Extremepro (talk) 10:09, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Rated C-class. The synopsis for the last book is much longer than any of the others; it should be shortened. Also, out of curiosity, what is the reasoning for the order in which the characters are listed? Importance in books? I was just curious. PrincessofLlyr (talk) 18:28, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    They are listed by race first then by importance within their races. Extremepro (talk) 21:28, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  7. The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel, The Alchemyst: The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel, The Magician: The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel, The Sorceress: The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel, The Necromancer: The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel I've spent the last few days cleaning these articles up (and creating in the case of The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel series page) could you please give them a look over and see if they can be raised up from start & stub classifications please? Any advice is welcome :) Thank you in advance! Zephfya (talk) 13:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2010

  1. Ramage (novel) - did some pretty big revisions. Not very good at assessment or I would do some of the above ones. SADADS (talk) 02:10, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    It looked pretty good - I rated it C-class. PrincessofLlyr (talk) 14:00, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. The Last Theorem - expanded from a stub. Thanks. --Bruce1eetalk 13:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you Sadads for the B-class rating. --Bruce1eetalk 05:21, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Up in the Air - is currently rated stub-class. I added information to the article, since Up in the Air (film) is loosely based upon this novel. I believe that the article should be rated at least Start-class. I was considering adding a section in the article that compares the novel to the film, since there are significant differences between the book and the film. Would adding such a section be appropriate so long as it has proper citations? --Dan Dassow (talk) 19:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, it's a start now. I think that would be alright if it had the citations. The "sales" section needs to be beefed up, and a "reception" detailing critics' reaction to the work should be added. Regards, —
    majestic titan) 19:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  4. Dark Guardian—Newly created article. The assessment would be appreciated. -- James26 (talk) 20:13, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Need (novel series)—Another newly created article. The assessment would be appreciated. -- James26 (talk) 20:13, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Assessed both Dark Guardian and Need (novel series). Both looked like C-class articles to me. --SilentAria talk 12:50, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. The Immortals (novel) - was stub. Applied template. Added infobox, publication history, etc. Upgrade to C? Maybe B? Nlowell 2010 (talk) 15:42, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I changed it to C and left a few comments on the talk page. PrincessofLlyr (talk) 16:06, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Not sure I quite agree. Certainly not B - but this article takes almost the opposite take to most on wikipedia. It is almost no content related material and all real world elements (most unusual). Although the real world material is good there is little to inform a reader about the nature of the work itself and why it is of interest/value. I would have placed this as Start myself. But good on whoever added the real world content! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 16:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Collectonian did not agree either and changed back to stub. I am new at rating articles, so I have no problem with those ratings being changed. It could be my inexperience, but I thought stub was a bit low, considering that it is somewhat informative and most stubs I have seen have almost no content whatsoever. I also addressed the lack of content related material on the talk page. PrincessofLlyr (talk) 17:37, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Definitely a start. Sadads (talk) 19:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. talk) 22:41, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
     DoneRaised to C class, much improved - still more scope but heading in the right direction. #:: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 17:44, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Saturday (novel) (currently start class) It was just a plot summary and some incorrect information about a film until I came along. I've added five or six solid sources, literary form, critical reception, and major themes. Plus re-written the plot synopsis and lead. I think I could do still more, but since I'm the sole editor would like some outside guidance before continuing. I had already asked for peer review, but since the article is only start class at the moment, and it's come on alot I think an assesment would be in order. Thanks, Ktlynch (talk) 11:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
     DoneRaised to C B class, and made peer review suggestions. Sadads (talk) 17:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Urban fantasy -- I've given this a bit of an overhaul, and also cleaned certain areas up a little. I'd appreciate the assessment whenever anyone has the time. -- James26 (talk) 21:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
     Done like it, very thorough and concise. Sources also appear reliable. Sadads (talk) 00:47, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. talk) 01:39, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  11. talk) 00:25, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  12. The Better Man (book). Recently crested areticle. i'm particualrly unsure what importance/priority this should get, low or mid, since it apparently got quite a bit of favorable critical reaction both in the UK and in India. DES (talk) 21:45, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  13. talk) 03:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I rated it B-class. You seem to have covered many aspects of the story and referenced them well. PrincessofLlyr (talk) 04:40, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Summer of My German Soldier Expanded from stub now includes infobox but needs picture --Falco little (talk) 20:50, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Rated C class. A good start.
    talk) 00:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  15. The 39 Clues--mono 00:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Rated C-class for reasonable coverage and decent referencing. PrincessofLlyr royal court 00:49, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  16. The Guardian (novel) I have added additional citations in the past and especially with the first one pointing to Amazon and the first 6 pages of the book and the back I see no need for further citation any more. Please advise....--Ruedi33a (talk) 17:05, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the start-class rating is still accurate. It needs more citations, particularly in the section about themes. External links do not count as references. It is a good start, but needs more work. PrincessofLlyr royal court 17:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I to agree with this assesment.Sadads (talk) 18:30, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Last Night in Twisted River – expanded from a stub. Thanks. --Bruce1eetalk 09:47, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Rated B class. Nice expansion.
    talk) 11:49, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Thank you. --Bruce1eetalk 11:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  18. The Star of Kazan should be permitted in high ratings.
    Still a stub, no significant change in quality.Sadads (talk) 22:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  19. The Windup Girl - wonder why it's a stub. A Nebula award winner is Low priority?
    since upgraded to START. Importance?
  20. talk) 02:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I think C (current rating) is accurate. PrincessofLlyr royal court 02:02, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks PrincessofLyr - graded it myself and wanted a second opinion.
    talk) 21:43, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  21. The Maze of Bones. It's Start class, but I think it has been much improved since then. Homework2 TalkWhat I do 00:31, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Still a start, but the editors are making changes, so will re-evaluate in a few days.
    talk) 00:14, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  22. The Seems It is currently a stub, but after working on it for a month now I think it can be a start class. Derild4921 14:10, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    assessed at start by User:Sadads. PrincessofLlyr royal court 01:23, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Danger Along the Ohio It is currently a stub. I has very much improved since I got there.Be a see (talk) 21:26, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Upgraded to start. Needs more development, but coming along.
    talk) 21:43, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  24. Slights Newly created. —Bruce1eetalk 08:06, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    classified at C. Fairly well-written, but I suggest a thorough copyedit for grammar and tense, as I fixed several problems. PrincessofLlyr royal court 16:01, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the assessment, and the fixes. I'll have a look at it again. —Bruce1eetalk 05:23, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2011

  1. Lionel Lincoln - Just created it, give it a whirl, and any suggestions would be great,Sadads (talk) 17:47, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The article is very well developed already, which made it a fun read for me. I rated B-class. Something to consider is more extensive research into the criticism of the novel (if any is available), as right now it is only based off of a handful of works. Also, a thorough copyedit would probably be good, as I corrected a few things just from my cursory read. PrincessofLlyr royal court 19:26, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  2. The Bishop's Man - expanded the stub. --maclean (talk) 06:56, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    C-class. I would suggest thorough copyediting, particularly for the prose. There are some parts where little words were just overlooked. Also, the "background" section could use some more sources. Good work so far. PrincessofLlyr royal court 17:33, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  3. First Light (novel) just expanded, taking to GA, comments welcome. Derild4921Review Me! 15:50, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    C-class, almost B. The prose needs work and a serious copyedit. I fixed some things, but a lot of it was hard to figure out what you were saying, so you're going to have to do some of it yourself. Also, at the end of the Critical reception section you have a link to ember; I assume you were trying to link to a book, maybe The City of Ember? I'll leave some more detailed comments on the talk page later. PrincessofLlyr royal court 17:42, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The Ash Garden - expanded the stub. --maclean (talk) 01:37, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    C class because it doesn't cover topics such as themes, style and other topics important to B class or higher novels very thoroughly, but otherwise a much better article than before,Sadads (talk) 02:33, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Angelfire (novel series) -- I already know this is C class or below, just wanted to reveal it. :) Thanks. -- James26 (talk) 22:15, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    completed by user:Sadads.
  6. SF novel that IMO has outgrown start-class. While I plead for b-class, I expect c-class to be the least outcome, when reassessing it. Thanks in advance (and enjoy reading! ;-) ), --Klingon83 (talk) 13:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I went for B-class. Very interesting article to read. The "setting" and "plot structure" sections need citations. Part of the B-class rating was because of the extensive bibliography, but it does need more inline citations. PrincessofLlyr royal court 15:13, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Charlie Johnson in the Flames - new article. maclean (talk) 21:15, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    C-class. Great article. I think pronouns could be used a bit more (especially in the synopsis), and it could also use a quick copyedit, mostly for punctuation. PrincessofLlyr royal court 21:20, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Player One -- new article, went through DYK last week. maclean (talk) 00:54, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    C - left notes on talk page, Sadads (talk) 02:07, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Enemies & Allies - new article. maclean (talk) 23:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Not sure how much there is to go much further on the topic considering it's a sci-fi novel. Sadads (talk) 00:37, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  10. The Red Rover - recently created, Sadads (talk) 13:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    C. Needs very thorough copyediting. I can leave specific comments if you like, but mostly it just needs a careful read. PrincessofLlyr royal court 14:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Right, thanks, I have been working on while I have been tired, so I am sure many of the mistakes are silly things, Sadads (talk) 14:31, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Ruins of Gorlan I have done a lot of work on it with some other people. what would you rate it? DarkJak495 : Chat 12:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    C class verging on B, a little better sense of thoroughness and completeness in each of the sections would be good, Sadads (talk) 23:27, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    2 points, it doesn't belong to the scope of our project per
    Talk:Runescape and our own definition of scope, and it is the highest rating that it can get without going through a review process, Sadads (talk) 01:05, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  12. Ruins of Gorlan The article has been given a full copy edit. What would you rate it?UserDarkJak495 talk orange 00:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Still C. Several sections need expansion before it will become B-class. PrincessofLlyr royal court 13:54, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  13. A Darker Domain, Recently expanded from stub, Sadads (talk) 19:00, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    C. Well-expanded. PrincessofLlyr royal court 22:47, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Unearthly -- Maybe not my best work, but felt I'd reveal the current state. No rush. Thanks. James26 (talk) 04:42, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    C. Sturdy, well-written article. PrincessofLlyr royal court 15:07, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Dead Beautiful -- Maybe not my best work, but felt I'd reveal the current state. No rush. Thanks. James26 (talk) 04:42, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Assessed at C-class. PrincessofLlyr royal court 15:07, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Charlie Madigan series -- Newly created. I'd appreciate it whenever time permits. James26 (talk) 01:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Assessed as C, slightly worried about the reliability of some of the sources, esp. the Blogs. Also, you should be able to expand information about themes and style more if they are full reviews, Sadads (talk) 02:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment -- The blogs are interviews, which mainly cite information directly stated by the author (Gay). Thanks for the assessment. James26 (talk) 02:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Kelly Gay -- Newly created. Talked with author. Trying to get an image on Commons. Last article for a while. I can finally rest now. I'd appreciate it whenever time permits. James26 (talk) 01:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Assessed as C, same worry about reliability of sources, esp. Blogs as above, this article relies more on them then the novel article does, Sadads (talk) 02:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment -- The blogs are interviews, which mainly cite information directly stated by the author (Gay). Thanks for the assessment. James26 (talk) 02:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  18. IUPUI. My classmates and I would be grateful for feedback. Thanks! Slis524kjs (talk) 03:15, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Looks very good, I assessed it as B, very much suggest nominating the article for GA review, Sadads (talk) 11:36, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Shikasta – expanded and request a re-assessment. Thanks. —Bruce1eetalk 12:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Strong, comprehensive article, upgraded to B. Suggest possible GA nomination soon. PrincessofLlyr royal court 13:49, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the upgrade; I've taken it to GAN. —Bruce1eetalk 13:59, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  20. IUPUI. I am a new editor in a classroom full of other new editors. Thanks! 50.90.49.86 (talk) 16:33, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Done, clearly a start class article. I left comments on the talk page at Talk:The God of the Animals, Sadads (talk) 16:45, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Solar -- Just finished reading the novel, found the article as a stub and fixed it up a bit, including some refs. Would appreciate a second pair of eyes. Cheers Yablochko (talk) 21:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. Seems to be start class. Need some more citations and information other than plot should be expanded. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:09, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Mzilikazi1939 (talk). Barkeep Chat | $ 16:36, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Upgraded to mid-importance. PrincessofLlyr royal court 16:44, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Clotel -- Requesting your consideration for reassessment of this entry due to recent contributions from several editors. Zamnesic (talk) 03:12, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Upgraded to B. Still needs some expansion and copyediting, but well on the way to GA. PrincessofLlyr royal court 04:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  24. (talk) 19:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  25. The Terror (novel) I see that this article is classed as 'Start'. I was wondering what needs to be done to it to upgrade it? I've put a lot of effort into fleshing it out from Stub, and I'm willing to have another look at it. Richytps (talk) 18:23, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    A List of Characters section perhaps? why not expand the plot a bit. i see that the article is rated C but with enough information this article can as well become GA
    Robin 05:38, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  26. The Spook's Destiny
     it's never been rated
    Done. Why not add a Reception section. I notice that the article has no references. A good interview with the author or something along those lines would work perfectly
    Robin 05:35, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  27. City at the End of Time – expanded from a stub and request a re-assessment. Thanks. —Bruce1eetalk 13:09, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    B-class. Great work on this one. PrincessofLlyr royal court 13:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. —Bruce1eetalk 14:08, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  28. Obernewtyn (novel) - I have completely reworked this article and would like it to please be reassessed. --Limolover (talk) 10:48, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    C-class. Still a few things that need to be fixed. I left a note on the talk page. PrincessofLlyr royal court 12:53, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  29. Obernewtyn (novel) - This article is now substantially reviewed and a re-assessment would be great --Limolover talk 06:08, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd say B-class is fair here. Not sure how much further the article can go. On another note: I didn't change it, but I disagree that Obernewtyn is of mid-importance. To me, a genre novel for young adults that hasn't won any major prizes is usually of low-importance. Still, like I said, I didn't change it since you may have a broader perspective of young adult literature.--Olegkagan (talk) 01:25, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  30. Marching Men - I just created this article recently so an initial assessment would be useful. I'll be expanding the article in the coming weeks, but light comments on what is currently there (particularly any prose that sounds awkward, etc.) would also be helpful. Thanks. --Olegkagan (talk) 01:25, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks good so far. The plot is a bit long compared to the rest of the sections, and for sure the empty sections need to be filled, but I'll keep an eye on it. Post here or ping me as you go along.
    talk) 02:18, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  31. Jaws (novel) - Rated Start-Class, seems much better than it. igordebraga ≠ 01:26, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I've re-rated B-class. Only a couple citations needed, otherwise great article. INeverCry 04:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2012

  1. Something Upstairs - I've written in a detailed summary and added some better information concerning awards and conception. Should be a little better than Stub-Class/Low-Importance from years ago. AngusWOOF (talk) 04:18, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I've re-rated C-class. The last few character descriptions need work, as do the conception and legacy sections. INeverCry 04:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. stoned 16:02, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I've re-rated B-class. Plot section needs to be expanded. I don't know if the cover really needs it's own section. INeverCry 04:37, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Zendegi – expanded from a stub and request a re-assessment. Thanks. —Bruce1eetalk 15:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Rated it c class, could use some fleshing out of themes, context, etc. Looks well done, but could use some more breadth/organization, Sadads (talk) 17:50, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the assessment and feedback. I'll have a look at it. —Bruce1eetalk 04:11, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Doglands. Newly created and I'm terrible at judging an article I've created. Brambleberry of RiverClan Chat ♠ Watch 20:23, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Assessed as start-class [3] maclean (talk) 03:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. The Little Sister I've done a lot of editing and sourcing and think its ready to move from stub status. Mdebellis (talk) 21:03, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Assessed as start-class [4] maclean (talk) 03:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Lottery (short story) is a newly created article on an Indian short story that is unassessed. Could it be assessed so the editor will know what he needs to do to improve the article? Thanks! MathewTownsend (talk) 10:52, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Assessed as C-class [5] maclean (talk) 03:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Love & Sleep is a newly created article about an American novel by John Crowley. It was assessed as a stub simply redirecting to the article for the series, I have expanded it, and it now references a bunch of new notable appearances.--Artimaean (talk) 01:46, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Assessed as C-class [6] maclean (talk) 03:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. talk) 06:47, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Assessed as B-class [7] maclean (talk) 03:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. The Prince and the Pauper. This article on the Twain novel was rated B-class quality back in 2007. Don't know if it has changed greatly since then (probably) but reassessment is in order unless I am much mistaken. It lacks virtually all of the recommended elements for a novel article. Richigi (talk) 17:47, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2013

  1. Assessed as C-class [8] maclean (talk) 03:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. The Marriages Between Zones Three, Four and Five – expanded and request a re-assessment. Thanks. —Bruce1eetalk 09:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Not to worry, I've taken it to GAN. —Bruce1eetalk 06:10, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Mean Streets (anthology) expanded and request a re-assessment. Thanks. —maclean (talk) 03:28, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Nice job. Olegkagan (talk) 21:19, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The Phantom Tollbooth is still listed as Start Class. I think the article is better than that. Please note: As this is children's literature and may be assigned by teachers for review by students, I think it is appropriate to leave the Wikipedia page somewhat general (e.g., on meanings and character motivations) so that it is useable in class. Sofia Roberts (talk) 18:40, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
     Done I think Start is still correct for this article. Being that a significant portion of it is Plot Summary, and the rest is primarily made up of lists. The fact that it is assigned to students should have no bearing on how general or specific an article is; Wikipedia is for everyone. The article needs plenty of work before it can be re-assessed. Olegkagan (talk) 21:19, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Devil's Gate (Cussler novel) expanded and request a re-assessment. Thanks. —maclean (talk) 05:43, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply
    ]

2014

  1.  Done Olegkagan (talk) 21:19, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Affliction (novel) Expanded and requesting an assessment. PaintedCarpet (talk) 16:14, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
     Done definitely a start: begins to address the main concerns related to understanding books as real world objects, but discussion is not extensive. Sadads (talk) 17:07, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2015

  1. Mistborn: The Final Empire pretty much rewrote the whole article, so I'm requesting a reassessment. Thanks! —Quachh (talk) 07:02, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done @
    WP:ALLPLOT, Sadads (talk) 02:50, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
     Done :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 12:45, 4 January 2016 (UTC) clearly improved[reply]
  2. Dean Koontz - have added references & a section on Critical Comment, request reassessment to upgrade from Stub class. Critical Comment could be further expanded & split into Themes (see Talk page) and Critical Comment as the novel is important (current rating: mid) as a departure from Koontz' usual genre. D A Patriarche, BSc (talk) (talk) 02:24, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
     Done @
    WP:ALLPLOT, Sadads (talk) 02:50, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  3. Marthandavarma (novel) – The article is substantially edited, amended, changed and updated post the last assessment in 2012. We hope the article has covered most of the features to have a reassessment. Requesting to reassess the article as applicable.—(harith (talk) 12:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC))[reply]
     Done @Harithvh: Left extensive comments at Talk:Marthandavarma_(novel), Sadads (talk) 01:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2016

  1. Unfettered (anthology) – The article was created by me more than a month ago. I'd like to have an assessment and comments on how to improve the article. Ciridae (talk) 12:31, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
     Done :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 12:43, 4 January 2016 (UTC) at least a start - but hard to say without research if there is much more to say.[reply]
  2. Wild Seed (novel) was the subject of a class project and has undergone some significant improvements, and should be reassessed. I haven't looked closely, but it's probably C or B class now. 0x0077BE (talk · contrib) 19:07, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3.  Done @0x0077BE: Its pretty good: there are some odd problems in there, but surpasses the quality of any number of c articles I can think of: so its a B. It needs someone to expand/write the lead to relfect the revisions, Sadads (talk) 06:34, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The Piazza Tales Expanded this Stub-class article to 21,000 bytes, the article now carries no unsourced material as well.MackyBeth (talk) 20:50, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
     Done @
    WP:Good Article nominations. You have done excellent work, and it could use the careful eye of a reviewer willing to take a deep dive with you on it. Sadads (talk) 06:34, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  5. Mother Night No sources. Does not deserve B-class status. Zamaster4536 (talk) 14:13, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Zamaster4536:  Done its a start, Sadads (talk) 04:06, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for your work! Zamaster4536 (talk) 05:08, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Growth of the Soil. Rewrote it. Not stub class anymore definitely. NikolaiHo 18:12, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nikolaiho: rerated -- its barely scraping by a as a c-class -- you need significantly more real world context, per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Novels, 04:06, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
  7. Bless Me, Ultima. Rewrote article. Should not be start class anymore. The importance of the novel should also be upgraded.Boccherini1942 (talk) 09:27, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
     Done @Boccherini1942: There is still a lot of work to do however: the plot and character sections are kindof long-winded, and there is considerable room for making the references and other citation material more consistent. At the moment, its definitely feeling its' multiple authorship (needs a bit of a guiding hand to give it some focus.
  8. The Encantadas. This needs a lot more work, but at 13,000 bytes and about zero unsourced material there's good reason to reconsider the Stubb-rating.MackyBeth (talk) 08:28, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @MackyBeth:  Done Thanks for the great work! Lots of room for fleshing out the lead, and other parts of the article still :) Sadads (talk) 22:59, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Americanah I've just expanded and also noted that the initial rating of low-importance happened, by chance, about a week before most of the attention for this book (the NYT "top ten of 2013" ranking, Beyonce notice and ensuing major boost in sales, etc.) There's also subsequently been a film adaptation announced as in development so I suspect a good number of readers might come looking for info on this one. Thanks for having a look. Innisfree987 (talk) 20:10, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
     DoneWell done @Innisfree987:! The article is in much better shape. It looks like there is still some room for developing the articles depth of coverage, but in general its a really good public resource. Sadads (talk) 14:27, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  10. An Untamed State Another well-received novel with a forthcoming film adaptation announced, so I think its importance to WP readers has grown since it was first assessed shortly after publication (two years ago). I've also expanded it significantly so I think it's at least a start now. Thanks! Innisfree987 (talk) 04:34, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
     Done I reassessed as start: its definitely in a pretty good shape: though the depth of coverage, in terms of themes and other topics isn't quite there. Sadads (talk) 14:27, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  11. In the Skin of a Lion - requesting reassessment above start-class EmilyMordue (talk) 18:18, 1 December 2016 (UTC) -->[reply]
     Done Reassessed as start-class: overall a very good article, though it lacks the depth of coverage, in terms of themes and other topics. Work on that and request a reassessment again.  LoMS talk 13:11, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  12. The Stone Carvers - requesting reassessment above start-class EmilyMordue (talk) 00:09 2 December 2016 (UTC)
     Done Reassessed as start-class: the lead needs to conform to
    WP:LEAD. Some background/development info should be added too.  LoMS talk 13:15, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  13. Shutter Island - requesting reassessment above start-class Marie-Pierre St-Louis (talk) 22:16, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Reassessed as start-class: missing info in the lead, see
    WP:LEAD. No themes section. No development/background section. Work on those, and ask for another reassessment.  LoMS talk 13:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]

2017

  1. The Light that Failed - I've expanded the article from stub to start class and am requesting an assessment for a second opinion and for improvement points. There's also a DYK nomination that is ongoing for this article. Ciridae (talk) 16:31, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @
    lead -- add a line or two from the Themes, Adaptions and Publications sections -- and request another assessment; it may qualify for B-class after those changes. LoMStalk 15:26, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  2. Airframe (novel) - requesting reassessment above start-class SaAnKe (talk) 21:56, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Reassessed as C-class: Needs to comply with
    WP:LEAD, could use some background around when in Crichton's career this was published and how the book was researched (given its theme on technical analysis), expanding on the references used (like this and this) maclean (talk) 03:57, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  3. Void Star requesting first assessment of this article I created. Thanks in advance, M.Kayali (talk) 03:12, 3 September 2017 (UTC).[reply]
     Done Reassessed as start-class: Needs further expansion to proceed to C-class. maclean (talk) 04:16, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Novels/Assessment/RequestArchive&oldid=1205007778"