Talk:The Path to Rome/GA1
Latest comment: 8 months ago by Chiswick Chap in topic GA review
GA review
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: ThaesOfereode (talk · contribs) 00:56, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 17:57, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
Comments
- This is a very nicely-written article and its structure, approach, and citations are plainly up to GA standard. My main concern is the considerable length of the plot sections. The rules on this are not set in stone: long and complex books can get away with a bit more plot text; but this book is not of exceptional length or complexity. Why do we need such a long plot section, and could it not be condensed to give a briefer encyclopedic overview without going into so much detail?
- Thanks for taking on this GA, Chiswick Chap, and for the kind words about the writing. The rationale for the length of the summary is threefold. For one, a travelog like this doesn't lend itself easily to standard plot configurations; there's no building tension, no climax, no resolution. Another is that I leafed through other FA-level travelogs and found similarly long summary sections, such as A Voyage Round the World. The last piece is that it's kind of difficult to objectively determine what should be in the summary. Part of the book's appeal is its focus on everyday life, which similarly makes it difficult. I cut a lot of sections, especially in France, which I found remarkable, but I couldn't justify including. I'm open to cutting things, but I had a lot of difficulty figuring out what to cut. I'd hate to do so, but I could understand the removal of the anarchist and horse episodes, and maybe trying to shorten the failed journey over the mountain and the Medesano episodes. Open to suggestions. ThaesOfereode (talk) 19:13, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
- I guess the more picaresque a book is, the harder to summarise. What we're trying to do in a Wikipedia summary, I think, is to sketch the outlines of a book without the colour. If you can trim those episodes that would be good. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:49, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, I've cut the anarchist and horse episodes, and trimmed the failed journey over the mountain and the Medesano episodes. ThaesOfereode (talk) 22:02, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
- Many thanks.
- Crisis magazine of 3 June 2022 triggers an Earwig copyvio warning for the Joseph Pearce quote. It seems quite reasonable to me that we should quote the passage under fair usage.
- I suggest that you gloss Pearce as a Catholic writer; you have hinted at spirituality for G. K. Chesterton but it might be useful to say he's Catholic too, given the role of faith in Belloc's life.
- Soft pushback here since Chesterton wasn't Catholic when he reviewed the book and wasn't Catholic when he wrote Orthodoxy either. I've glossed Pearce though. ThaesOfereode (talk) 13:19, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
- Given this context, you might add that Stephen Graham went on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem.
- Was a little leery of OR here (perhaps unjustly), but I've added it. ThaesOfereode (talk) 13:19, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
- Please add a gloss for Jakupcak; she is a Dominican Sister of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist, so the gloss might say "the Catholic nun", for instance.
- Glossed ThaesOfereode (talk) 13:19, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
- A. N. Wilson too needs a gloss; he was raised a Catholic, went to an Anglican seminary and then became a secular writer: "author interested in religion" might fit the bill.
- I think Wilson's purview is a bit wider than that, but I've still glossed him. ThaesOfereode (talk) 13:19, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
- You gloss Chesterton and repeat his initials at the second mention.
- Might be good to move the 2nd quote box up one paragraph.
- Why? The quote is from the Calestano episode, not the Medesano or Taro-crossing ones. ThaesOfereode (talk) 13:19, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
Belloc's ten-page description of Flavigny, a "comparatively obscure town", than to all of Tuscany
- something missing here.
- Not sure what you mean here. Do I need to gloss Tuscany or something? ThaesOfereode (talk) 13:19, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
- I can't parse the sentence, even with an 'A' in my Use of English half a century ago. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:38, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
- I must have shorted out writing this sentence and then again rereading it; apologies! I think it should be good to go now. ThaesOfereode (talk) 14:41, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
Images
- All the images are Public Domain and on Commons. All are directly relevant.
Sources
- Spot-checks: [17] ok; [19] ok; [24] ok; [24] ok; [26] ok.
Summary
- This is now ready for GA status, with just a couple of very minor suggestions to be implemented. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:29, 26 September 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.