Today we are going to talk about Wikipedia:Featured article review/Stephen Crane/archive1. This is a topic that has generated great interest in recent times, and that undoubtedly has a significant impact on our lives. Wikipedia:Featured article review/Stephen Crane/archive1 is something that we can all relate to in one way or another, since it is present in different aspects of our daily lives. In this article, we will thoroughly explore the various aspects of Wikipedia:Featured article review/Stephen Crane/archive1, analyzing its importance, its influence on society and the impact it has on our daily lives. In addition, we will address some perspectives and opinions of experts on the subject, in order to provide a more complete and informed view of Wikipedia:Featured article review/Stephen Crane/archive1. Get ready to embark on a fascinating journey of discovery!
Stephen Crane (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
As noted in November 2022 by Buidhe, the referencing in this 2008 FA is unclear and incomplete, and Sorrentino 2014, a work described as "the best biography", "a major and indispensable account", and "the standard source", is used minimally.
I also believe less superficial issues are extant. 60% of this ~10,000-word article is devoted to a biography which spanned just 28 years. This section is bloated by many extraneous quotes and details which greatly lengthen it.
Moreover, overviews such as this encyclopedia entry and this bibliography show a much greater emphasis on literature analysis than this article reflects (currently, the Fiction and Poetry section is just over 25% of the article's prose). There are several aspects the article doesn't touch on at all: for example, the biographical fabrications of Thomas Beer have been the focus of three sources but are not mentioned in the article.
In summary, I think the article needs improvement to meet FA criteria 1a), 1b), 1c), 1d), and 2c). As a rough estimate, I'd suggest that the "Biography" section be cut by a couple of thousand words, and the literary analysis extended by a commensurate amount, with source improvement, if the article is to keep FA status. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)