Article commentsEdit

Moved from: Memory Alpha:Featured article nominations

    • IMO, there should be an introductory blurb that briefly explains the situation (who is Nero, what is Rura Penthe, how'd he end up there, etc.). Not long, for it's described elsewhere. But a little background would be helpful, especially for those like I who have only vague, cursory knowledge of Nero on RP.
    • Dragging back into his "hole"? What's that? Please define it, first.
    • "The Romulan remains determined...". About what exactly? It says he wants to keep in fighting shape, but is he determined to achieve the latter or keep fighting Targs, or both? Why not say something more like "despite his subjection to such harsh treatment for the mere amusement of his Klingon captors, his resolve to stay in shape gives him the fortitude to keep participating in these gladiatorial-type matches."
    • There are several awkward phrasings, such as "The commander continues to explain..." does that mean he continually explains the following OR (more likely), continues [on], saying 'xxx...'"
    • These two paragraphs don't flow well: "More days pass, which turn into months, into years. Ten years go by, then fifteen, then twenty years have passed.'" Leads into "Nero is talking to a figure in a dark passageway...," It seems disjointed.
    • The tense, which has mostly been in the present, jumps startlingly to the past: "Nero has killed the Klingons and freed himself." why not "Nero kills... and frees himself."? Especially considering the sentence that follows that one.
    • The misspelling of the Klingon might be a sort of nitpick. Not sure why it's there.
    • I'm also unsure if the "references" section is formatted correctly. Shouldn't the list of characters be elsewhere?
    • Enough bashing. The article's prose is in an exciting, almost melodramatic style. It's a fun read. The bg info seems well-sourced and interesting. AFAIK, all the facts about the work are present. It even includes pics, which is hard for written material.
  • I think it needs a little prose tweaking. Other than that, good job to whoever wrote it! It's usually hard to get exciting accounts of written Trek work; many don't even have a synopsis (again, AFAIK). I'm not sure whether to support or oppose; all I could do was give some comments, which I'm unsure are valid reasons. Cepstrum (talk) 19:30, January 30, 2011 (UTC)
      • Comment: Thanks for both comments on the article. If I may explain, the article is written in a way so as to reflect the style of the comic itself. I'll address the individual points in turn:
        • His "hole" is how it's written in the comic. One of the guards says, "Throw him back in his hole!".
        • Again, in the comic, Nero says, "Let them use me for sport. The fights keep me strong as the years pass"
        • I admit the continues to explain line could be better. I will take your recommendation and change it to "continues on, saying"
        • The time passing sentence again is how it is written in the comic. It's the style of the writers, how it's described in there so I thought it best to stick with that so as to reflect the product accurately.
        • I think the mispelling thing reflects the artwork of the comic and provides some useful background info that not everyone would be aware of. If I could point to one example on the Ghosts (Marvel) article which point outs out a mistake in the shuttle drawing?
        • I could separate the list of characters on the page and include further references later on. That shouldn't be a problem.
        • Thanks for the compliment!
      • One further thing I would urge people to consider is that this is not an episode or a technology article but a comic article and, as such, there are fewer things that can be said about it. Therefore, the article would be shorter than most other featured articles but I would emplore you to consider this in the scope of most comic articles, like Ghosts (Marvel). Also, the prose is going to be slightly different to an episode synopsis as this is a comic after all and is written in a different style. I'll get to work on sorting out those few points above. --TrekFan Open a channel 19:15, January 30, 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment
    • I agree about the length – there isn't that much to say about a comic I suppose, unless it's some huge noteworthy one.
    • As for the things about the "hole" and the quote from Nero: I think an explanation would be helpful, for we can't see the images, only the text. (Doesn't the comic depict stuff like the "hole"? And constraining yourself to use only their words isn't necessary, I believe.) I think additional explanations are called for. ("A picture is worth 1000 words!") ;)
    • Again, I believe it might be better to deviate from just using direct lines from the comic (re the line about the "time passing sentence"). I don't think you should necessarily follow the style of the writers – you're own style would probably be better for a text-based encyclopædia.
    • I'm not necessarily saying you should excise the misspelling bginfo. I was just wondering whether it's helpful for the reader. I guess it'd be good for completeness, but it comes across as a little negative and perhaps even irrelevant. Or maybe it is important if it means you don't know which spelling to use in the article. I don't know what the "nitpicking" policy is for things such as comics. Or even if it's a nitpick.
    • Separating the characters into canon and non-canon (or something similar) seems to be how non-canon licensed works are done here, as well as putting the character list in its own section (which you're evidently going to do).
    • I also agree that the style of the article should be different from summarizing the episodes. I also don't know how long the summary should be. It is supposed to be a summary and not a complete retelling, AFAIK. (Though IMO, the more the better, especially for readers who don't own the comic. But it might be a problem if you told so much that the reader felt s/he didn't need to buy the comic!) Cepstrum (talk) 19:59, January 30, 2011 (UTC)
    • Edit: per the FA nomination policy, I should probably remove my comments to the article's talk page. (This is turning into a discussion.) I'll not remove my comments w/out an admin's approval/doing, though. Cepstrum (talk) 20:28, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

--- Moved

Taking a shot Edit

I thought I'd take a quick shot at addressing some of the above; please revert if you don't like!

Cepstrum (talk)

By all means, please do! It's a community effort, remember! :) -- TrekFan Open a channel 15:21, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
I just saw your edits. Nice work. I have, however, moved the "recap" section into the intro as it is effectively the intro anyway, and also just to make it a little easier on the eye, what with all the titles on the page. I hope you don't mind that? Otherwise, I like what you did with the change of wording in a few sentences. I don't think there's much more than can be done to this one now. -- TrekFan Open a channel 15:52, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
I've simplified it a bit more. The "introduction" section is now actually an introductory paragraph. I did skip the recap though, as it's general practice to not have the recap, and have the reader actually read the preceding articles. :)
I do think that the images need better captions as opposed to just a quote of what's in the image as the caption. Some context would be good on those.
Also, the BG item noting that the story is based on a deleted scene isn't quite correct. RO and AK wrote out a full storyline for the "movie" (including the events of Countdown) that included the basic gist of what happened in this comic series. TJ and MJ work for Bad Robot and wrote the final script based on the story outline given to them. (There was apparently a lot more back and forth than that admittedly, but you get the idea.) As such, I think that BG item needs some rewording, but I'm not entirely certain as to how. -- sulfur 16:09, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, guys, for correcting. As I mentioned to TF, I was just guessing on the facts (I've little knowledge of this) and hoping he'd (or someone) correct/fill in details, or, completely revert parts. My edit was merely "suggestive". ;-) Probably the only things that might be worth keeping are the (very) minor grammar fixes as well as (maybe) my hurried tweaks to the prose (I don't know if you've changed them, but if haven't, you might want to look at the "diff" in the summary section to see my prose tweaks). The article has my full support for FA status. Great job, guys.

One more thing: if you want, I can take the article along with me on my way to the hospital for a thorough examination of the prose, giving it one more copy-edit.

Cepstrum (talk) 16:58, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Good job on rewording that BG note , Defiant. It looks a lot better now. -- TrekFan Open a channel 01:32, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, Defiant. Because Sulfur said there were problems with some of the captions and bginfo, I took a quick try at "tweaking" them. (I see Defiant has already helped me out on some of my gaffes in the bg; thanks!) Please take a look and adjust/revert/comment as necessary. I don't think I can do any more to help, physically or mentally. It's all up to you, now! Cepstrum (talk) 18:12, February 3, 2011 (UTC)