228:
1546:
work, first foray into a genre, ...), the publisher, ... should always be covered, and e.g. the fact that it hasn't been reprinted is interesting basic info if available (as it was here). There is no problem with replying "I can't find any info on translations" after such questions are raised, but the GA review should raise the questions, and whoever wants this to be promoted to GA should try to constructively answer, instead of, well, this.
297:
276:
21:
1278:
1252:
1225:
1191:
1163:
1133:
1109:
1077:
1050:
1027:
1004:
966:
923:
76:
138:
107:
765:
442:
307:
148:
1297:
385:
1652:
805:
738:
730:
701:
681:
670:
641:
630:
248:
1760:
looked about the same before it was an FA, so I think can be reasonably argued to present GA expectations just as well, and includes such context. I completely respect that this is about the book and not the author, but I think this limited information specifically is closer to what would be expected
1314:
cover the majos aspects, it tells us absolutely nothing about its creation, background, place in the oeuvre of the author, printing history, translations, ...? Never mind its place in a broader history of similar works, possible inspirations, ... All we have is plot and reception, which are important
1813:
or including a bunch of raw data from sources on the author and allowing the reader to draw their own conclusions. I have also not added anything about the publisher, seeing as the sources basically just name-check it anyway (and I consider the publisher a non-defining aspect of this and pretty much
1771:
I noticed Hoary's comments on talk about the "time in reverse" narrative. Given that this is a term-of-art for which we don't have a dedicated article, this quote might be better paraphrased to note Clute is describing it as the first example of the aging-backwards literary device (I think?), rather
1168:
The article represents viewpoints fairly and without apparent bias. It quotes both positive and negative reviews from the time of the novel's publication and incorporates modern critical perspectives. It doesn't appear to favor any specific interpretation over another and lets the reader make their
1751:
in-scope to put some more info in "Publication history" about the author (roughly: how many other books did he publish in general, was the pseudonym used again after this, if possible was this a typical or atypical example of his work). I recognize this is going to be a borderline call because the
1545:
As the article had nothing at all about anything but the reception of the book, it was rather hard to determine which aspects were omitted and which don't have coverage at all. A GA review should at the very least raise these issues, and things like the place in the oeuvre (was it a debut, a later
1743:
The lead is remarkably short, and should reasonably be two or possibly three full paragraphs. This is the most serious concern -- "complies with the MOS on leads" is a much more objective criterion than "broad", and one obviously rather than debatably not yet in compliance. The most intuitive way
1385:
Speaking as a GAR coord: Fram is correct that GAR generally handles existing GAs that have fallen below the standards. The thing to do here would be to vacate the review and return the nomination to the pool. The best move right now is to raise the issue at WT:GAN so more editors can weigh in.
1366:
might be a better place to raise this topic. It would certainly mean that more people would see it, at least. Anyway, you say that article does not cover the major aspects of the subject matter. Would you say that's because (1) these major aspects are mentioned in the cited sources but not the
1621:
out of the alleged "topsy-turvydom" of
Japanese mœurs. Of course, claimed resemblances that happen to occur to some random Knowledge editor (me) shouldn't be the basis for additions to articles, but they might be a springboard for digging around in Google Scholar or similar, which might bring
1444:
I thought you might have wanted to first address the issues before starting a new GA submission. Apparently the one sentence you added (and where the part "Through the 20th century, it never saw a reprint." seems to be missing in the source given?) is sufficient in your view for all the above
1738:
I quite enjoyed reading this article. I take the strict rather than lax view of 'breadth' in the GACR (and, in the general rather than specific case, agree with Fram about the implications of the lax view), but I think this is generally very close to being a GA. My thoughts:
1592:
I read in the article that in the opinion of one informed person, this novel "may be the earliest example of the Time in
Reverse tale presented in full-fledged narrative form". There's no link for "Time in Reverse tale" (and the article to which
1114:
The article covers the main aspects of the topic. It discusses the novel's synopsis, its reception both during its time of publication and in later years. It provides important details about the plot, the characters, and the themes of the
1367:
article, (2) the major aspects are mentioned in sources that are not cited but should have been, (3) the major aspects are not mentioned in any available sources and the article is consequently fundamentally ineligible for
1776:
Comments broadly debatable; the lead is the most important thing currently holding up promotion, but there are a lot of ways to handle it. The bones of the article are excellent, and I hope to promote this very soon.
1805:, for instance). I have added some (in my opinion, loosely relevant) details to the body. I have not added any comparison to the author's other works (beyond the already-included unfavourable critical comparisons to
1873:
971:
The article does have a lead section that introduces the topic and the layout appears well-organized. The style of writing avoids overly complex phrases and seems to avoid editorializing or making judgments.
517:
434:
1657:
810:
1764:
Similarly, it seems worthwhile to include a little detail about the publisher, as they're now defunct and the name won't necessarily be recognizable. Our article clarifies at the time they were
1511:"Omitting" implies that the information is actually found in the sources. That's the issue here—coverage of this topic, at least in sources that are easily available, is not particularly broad.
1863:
1744:
this would work out to me is "first paragraph handling the synopsis and second handling the publication + reception", but book leads can be flexible and there could be a few ways to handle it.
1868:
1757:
1138:
The article seems to stay focused on the novel itself, avoiding unnecessary details. The synopsis may be a bit extensive, but it seems justified given the unusual elements of the plot.
237:
117:
1523:, but what those main aspects are is determined by the sources, not editors. If e.g. translations and inspirations aren't covered in the sources, then those aren't major aspects.
1230:
Given this book is in public domain, the article would be improved by a cover, any accompanying illustrations, or photo of the author. I've added cover myself to bring this to GA
257:
121:
1858:
1662:
815:
1888:
902:
363:
353:
1690:
954:
843:
32:
1843:
1893:
1794:
I usually write comparatively brief leads. I have now expanded it somewhat and could expand it more, if you want me to. I would note that the lead is now : -->
1680:
928:
The prose is clear, concise, and grammatically correct. It seems understandable to a broad audience with enough knowledge about literature and sci-fi themes.
833:
564:
1883:
1217:
596:
329:
1597:
redirects deals with much weightier matters than SF); but this got me wondering about other more or less literary reversals in the late 19th century.
1898:
958:
950:
218:
1708:
861:
53:
1853:
1729:
1019:
942:
208:
1315:
aspects but don't give a reasonably complete overview of the subject at all. I believe the topic doesn't merit a GA designation as it stands.
320:
281:
1878:
430:
548:
46:
1244:
892:
183:
181:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the
1848:
1838:
1527:
being an essay does not in any way invalidate that rather fundamental point—sources determine the relative weight of the various
1497:
Thanks, I had missed that sentence in the reference. GACRNOT is an essay, and even then it hardly supports omitting all of this.
1240:
996:
946:
1685:
1609:(which deserves more in en:WP than what it now gets: two thirds of a single, compact paragraph), is about a societal reversal.
1149:
898:
838:
38:
1391:
1042:
882:
687:
535:
417:
1407:
GA removed per comments above and discussion at GAN, feel free to renominate when you believe it to be ready of course.
695:
161:
112:
87:
1810:
1795:
10% of the word count of the body, which I would consider fairly lengthy (more than twice the proportion found in the
476:
1796:
1783:
1723:
312:
1387:
938:
664:
1348:
GAR is for when an article no longer meets the GA criteria, not for when a brand new GA review is disputed.
986:
1704:
1610:
1518:
1368:
1339:
1125:
1101:
857:
780:
724:
635:
624:
20:
1801:
1778:
1719:
400:
93:
1819:
1815:
1565:
1561:
1536:
1532:
1488:
1484:
1435:
1431:
1376:
1372:
1069:
1065:
770:
691:
584:
580:
554:
this may be the earliest example of the Time in
Reverse tale presented in full-fledged narrative form
544:"may be the earliest example of the time in reverse tale presented in full-fledged narrative form"?
426:"may be the earliest example of the time in reverse tale presented in full-fledged narrative form"?
328:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1464:
1423:
1363:
876:
384:
227:
1528:
1524:
1468:
1335:
776:
541:
497:
423:
42:
1472:
1823:
1788:
1733:
1631:
1602:
1569:
1555:
1540:
1506:
1492:
1454:
1439:
1416:
1395:
1380:
1357:
1343:
1324:
1207:
886:
784:
588:
501:
1627:
592:
325:
1475:
of the cited source: "Only two of the six were ever reprinted in the twentieth century:
1551:
1512:
1502:
1450:
1412:
1353:
1320:
675:
600:
1618:
1832:
1594:
1331:
872:
153:
1768:-- it seems worthwhile to clarify this poorly-received work came from a major house.
1601:
is of course about a reversal. The only SF novel of the period that I've ever read,
1055:
Sample of sources have been checked and verified. Quotes from reviewers are accurate
461:
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below.
296:
275:
493:
405:
553:
178:
1296:
764:
467:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
1623:
603:
this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
302:
147:
143:
137:
106:
1758:
Archaeology, Anthropology, and
Interstellar Communication#Publication history
1547:
1498:
1446:
1408:
1349:
1316:
395:
1711:. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
864:. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
306:
174:
170:
479:), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page.
597:
Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bellona's
Husband: A Romance
247:
1560:
If you had asked, I would have answered. You didn't—you asserted.
166:
435:
Template:Did you know nominations/Bellona's
Husband: A Romance
379:
69:
15:
657:
Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
440:
246:
226:
165:, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
1874:
Unknown-importance 19th century novels task force articles
1766:
one of the largest and best-known publishers in the world
1460:
1427:
1371:
status, or (4) some other reason I haven't thought of?
522:
513:
59:
433:. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at
710:
650:
610:
324:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
717:Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
572:: Open to alternative hooks or rephrasing this one.
1864:Unknown-importance Science fiction novels articles
1809:), because I could not do so without engaging in
1428:You were told to restore the original nomination.
1211:and other media, where possible and appropriate.
1869:GA-Class 19th century novels task force articles
45:. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
1216:(images are tagged and non-free content have
8:
1622:material that would enrich this article. --
565:Template:Did you know nominations/Mango cult
481:No further edits should be made to this page
1169:own judgments based on the presented facts.
591:. Post-promotion hook changes for this nom
1640:
793:
270:
101:
408:). The text of the entry was as follows:
1859:GA-Class Science fiction novels articles
1889:Low-importance science fiction articles
1671:
1643:
824:
796:
272:
187:to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
103:
1765:
1516:
617:Article is new enough and long enough
1844:Language and literature good articles
1709:Talk:Bellona's Husband: A Romance/GA2
862:Talk:Bellona's Husband: A Romance/GA1
429:A record of the entry may be seen at
338:Knowledge:WikiProject Science Fiction
33:Language and literature good articles
7:
1894:WikiProject Science Fiction articles
431:Knowledge:Recent additions/2023/June
341:Template:WikiProject Science Fiction
318:This article is within the scope of
159:This article is within the scope of
75:
73:
549:The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction
92:It is of interest to the following
1422:This is not what you were told at
14:
1884:GA-Class science fiction articles
441:
41:. If you can improve it further,
1334:of you believe this to be true.
1295:
1276:
1250:
1223:
1189:
1161:
1158:Fair representation without bias
1131:
1107:
1075:
1048:
1025:
1002:
964:
921:
763:
736:
728:
699:
679:
668:
639:
628:
383:
305:
295:
274:
146:
136:
105:
74:
19:
1899:Knowledge Did you know articles
901:for what the criteria are, and
464:Please do not modify this page.
358:This article has been rated as
213:This article has been rated as
1772:than just giving the raw text.
918:(prose, spelling, and grammar)
29:has been listed as one of the
1:
1854:Low-importance novel articles
1515:3a requires that the article
332:and see a list of open tasks.
255:This article is supported by
235:This article is supported by
1430:I have now done so for you.
1277:
1251:
1224:
1190:
1162:
1132:
1108:
1076:
1049:
1026:
1003:
965:
922:
536:Bellona's Husband: A Romance
418:Bellona's Husband: A Romance
392:Bellona's Husband: A Romance
193:Knowledge:WikiProject Novels
27:Bellona's Husband: A Romance
1879:WikiProject Novels articles
747:
477:Knowledge talk:Did you know
469:this nomination's talk page
321:WikiProject Science Fiction
196:Template:WikiProject Novels
1915:
364:project's importance scale
313:Speculative fiction portal
238:Science fiction task force
219:project's importance scale
184:general Project discussion
1824:12:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
1789:09:13, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
1734:09:12, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
1599:Through the Looking Glass
357:
290:
254:
234:
212:
131:
100:
1632:03:36, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
1570:07:56, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
1556:07:48, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
1541:19:03, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
1507:10:23, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
1493:09:56, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
1455:09:43, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
1440:09:20, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
1417:08:30, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
1396:02:29, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
1381:21:58, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
1358:16:36, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
1344:16:22, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
1325:13:12, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
887:06:46, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
785:23:03, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
589:05:19, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
532:... that the 1887 novel
502:14:49, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
414:... that the 1887 novel
394:appeared on Knowledge's
344:science fiction articles
1849:GA-Class novel articles
1839:Knowledge good articles
1218:non-free use rationales
911:reasonably well written
905:for what they are not)
473:the article's talk page
454:Did you know nomination
404:column on 7 June 2023 (
258:19th century task force
1611:Basil Hall Chamberlain
446:
251:
231:
82:This article is rated
1802:To Kill a Mockingbird
1362:I would suggest that
1205:It is illustrated by
1150:neutral point of view
1093:broad in its coverage
587:). Self-nominated at
444:
250:
230:
39:good article criteria
1811:WP:Original research
1761:in the book article.
1388:Trainsandotherthings
1306:Objection to GA pass
1032:sources are reliable
688:copyright violations
1814:every other book).
1797:WP:Featured article
1481:A Plunge into Space
1009:references included
1531:, editors do not.
1186:No edit wars, etc.
982:factually accurate
696:close paraphrasing
447:
252:
232:
162:WikiProject Novels
88:content assessment
57:: July 20, 2023. (
1807:Inquirendo Island
1699:
1698:
1477:Across the Zodiac
1310:The article does
1302:
1294:(Criteria marked
1245:suitable captions
997:reference section
852:
851:
758:
757:
746:
745:
709:
708:
665:Adequate sourcing
649:
648:
604:
557:
542:William James Roe
451:
450:
424:William James Roe
378:
377:
374:
373:
370:
369:
269:
268:
265:
264:
68:
67:
64:
1906:
1720:Vaticidalprophet
1653:Copyvio detector
1641:
1299:
1292:
1280:
1279:
1254:
1253:
1227:
1226:
1193:
1192:
1165:
1164:
1135:
1134:
1111:
1110:
1079:
1078:
1052:
1051:
1029:
1028:
1020:reliable sources
1006:
1005:
968:
967:
925:
924:
806:Copyvio detector
794:
774:
767:
748:
740:
739:
732:
731:
711:
703:
702:
683:
682:
672:
671:
651:
643:
642:
632:
631:
611:
578:
545:
488:The result was:
466:
443:
387:
380:
346:
345:
342:
339:
336:
315:
310:
309:
299:
292:
291:
286:
278:
271:
201:
200:
197:
194:
191:
156:
151:
150:
140:
133:
132:
127:
124:
109:
102:
85:
79:
78:
77:
70:
62:
60:Reviewed version
51:
23:
16:
1914:
1913:
1909:
1908:
1907:
1905:
1904:
1903:
1829:
1828:
1703:This review is
1695:
1667:
1639:
1615:Things Japanese
1590:
1369:WP:Good article
1308:
1300:are unassessed)
1241:appropriate use
1147:It follows the
856:This review is
848:
820:
792:
787:
768:
737:
729:
700:
680:
669:
640:
629:
529:
527:
523:Article history
462:
456:
343:
340:
337:
335:Science Fiction
334:
333:
326:science fiction
311:
304:
284:
282:Science Fiction
198:
195:
192:
189:
188:
152:
145:
125:
115:
86:on Knowledge's
83:
58:
12:
11:
5:
1912:
1910:
1902:
1901:
1896:
1891:
1886:
1881:
1876:
1871:
1866:
1861:
1856:
1851:
1846:
1841:
1831:
1830:
1827:
1826:
1774:
1773:
1769:
1762:
1745:
1714:
1713:
1697:
1696:
1694:
1693:
1688:
1683:
1677:
1674:
1673:
1669:
1668:
1666:
1665:
1663:External links
1660:
1655:
1649:
1646:
1645:
1638:
1635:
1589:
1588:Topsy-turvydom
1586:
1585:
1584:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1580:
1579:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1575:
1574:
1573:
1572:
1517:addresses the
1405:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1401:
1400:
1399:
1398:
1307:
1304:
1290:
1289:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1283:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1258:
1235:
1234:
1233:
1231:
1203:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1199:
1197:
1176:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1170:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1139:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1116:
1089:
1088:
1087:
1086:
1085:
1083:
1060:
1059:
1058:
1056:
1037:
1036:
1035:
1033:
1018:(citations to
1014:
1013:
1012:
1010:
978:
977:
976:
975:
974:
972:
933:
932:
931:
929:
867:
866:
850:
849:
847:
846:
841:
836:
830:
827:
826:
822:
821:
819:
818:
816:External links
813:
808:
802:
799:
798:
791:
788:
775:Good article.
756:
755:
744:
743:
742:
741:
733:
719:
718:
707:
706:
705:
704:
684:
673:
659:
658:
647:
646:
645:
644:
633:
619:
618:
609:
608:
593:will be logged
576:
575:
574:
573:
567:
526:
525:
520:
510:
508:
504:
486:
485:
457:
455:
452:
449:
448:
438:
428:
427:
388:
376:
375:
372:
371:
368:
367:
360:Low-importance
356:
350:
349:
347:
330:the discussion
317:
316:
300:
288:
287:
285:Low‑importance
279:
267:
266:
263:
262:
253:
243:
242:
233:
223:
222:
215:Low-importance
211:
205:
204:
202:
199:novel articles
158:
157:
141:
129:
128:
126:Low‑importance
110:
98:
97:
91:
80:
66:
65:
50:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1911:
1900:
1897:
1895:
1892:
1890:
1887:
1885:
1882:
1880:
1877:
1875:
1872:
1870:
1867:
1865:
1862:
1860:
1857:
1855:
1852:
1850:
1847:
1845:
1842:
1840:
1837:
1836:
1834:
1825:
1821:
1817:
1812:
1808:
1804:
1803:
1798:
1793:
1792:
1791:
1790:
1787:
1786:
1782:
1781:
1770:
1767:
1763:
1759:
1755:
1750:
1746:
1742:
1741:
1740:
1736:
1735:
1731:
1728:
1725:
1721:
1718:
1712:
1710:
1706:
1701:
1700:
1692:
1689:
1687:
1684:
1682:
1679:
1678:
1676:
1675:
1670:
1664:
1661:
1659:
1656:
1654:
1651:
1650:
1648:
1647:
1642:
1636:
1634:
1633:
1629:
1625:
1620:
1616:
1612:
1608:
1604:
1600:
1596:
1595:Time Reversal
1587:
1571:
1567:
1563:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1544:
1543:
1542:
1538:
1534:
1530:
1526:
1522:
1520:
1514:
1510:
1509:
1508:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1490:
1486:
1482:
1478:
1474:
1470:
1466:
1462:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1452:
1448:
1443:
1442:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1425:
1421:
1420:
1419:
1418:
1414:
1410:
1397:
1393:
1389:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1378:
1374:
1370:
1365:
1361:
1360:
1359:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1346:
1345:
1341:
1337:
1333:
1329:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1322:
1318:
1313:
1305:
1303:
1301:
1298:
1284:
1282:
1281:
1274:
1271:
1270:
1268:
1265:
1259:
1256:
1255:
1248:
1246:
1242:
1236:
1232:
1229:
1228:
1221:
1219:
1213:
1212:
1210:
1209:
1204:
1198:
1195:
1194:
1187:
1184:
1183:
1181:
1177:
1171:
1167:
1166:
1159:
1156:
1155:
1153:
1151:
1146:
1140:
1137:
1136:
1129:
1127:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1112:
1105:
1103:
1102:major aspects
1097:
1096:
1094:
1090:
1084:
1081:
1080:
1073:
1071:
1067:
1061:
1057:
1054:
1053:
1046:
1044:
1038:
1034:
1031:
1030:
1023:
1021:
1015:
1011:
1008:
1007:
1000:
998:
992:
991:
989:
988:
983:
979:
973:
970:
969:
962:
960:
956:
952:
948:
944:
940:
934:
930:
927:
926:
919:
915:
914:
912:
908:
907:
906:
904:
900:
896:
894:
889:
888:
884:
881:
878:
874:
871:
865:
863:
859:
854:
853:
845:
842:
840:
837:
835:
832:
831:
829:
828:
823:
817:
814:
812:
809:
807:
804:
803:
801:
800:
795:
789:
786:
782:
778:
772:
766:
761:
753:
750:
749:
735:Interesting:
734:
726:
723:
722:
721:
720:
716:
713:
712:
697:
693:
689:
685:
677:
674:
666:
663:
662:
661:
660:
656:
653:
652:
637:
634:
626:
623:
622:
621:
620:
616:
613:
612:
607:
606:
605:
602:
598:
594:
590:
586:
582:
571:
568:
566:
562:
559:
558:
555:
551:
550:
543:
539:
538:
537:
531:
530:
524:
521:
519:
515:
512:
511:
507:
505:
503:
499:
495:
491:
484:
482:
478:
474:
470:
465:
459:
458:
453:
439:
436:
432:
425:
421:
420:
419:
413:
410:
409:
407:
403:
402:
397:
393:
389:
386:
382:
381:
365:
361:
355:
352:
351:
348:
331:
327:
323:
322:
314:
308:
303:
301:
298:
294:
293:
289:
283:
280:
277:
273:
260:
259:
249:
245:
244:
240:
239:
229:
225:
224:
220:
216:
210:
207:
206:
203:
186:
185:
180:
179:short stories
176:
172:
168:
164:
163:
155:
154:Novels portal
149:
144:
142:
139:
135:
134:
130:
123:
119:
114:
111:
108:
104:
99:
95:
89:
81:
72:
71:
61:
56:
55:
48:
44:
40:
36:
35:
34:
28:
25:
22:
18:
17:
1806:
1800:
1784:
1779:
1775:
1753:
1748:
1737:
1726:
1716:
1715:
1702:
1691:Instructions
1614:
1606:
1598:
1591:
1521:of the topic
1519:main aspects
1480:
1476:
1406:
1336:Onegreatjoke
1311:
1309:
1293:
1291:
1272:
1266:
1238:
1215:
1206:
1196:no edit wars
1185:
1179:
1157:
1148:
1123:
1099:
1092:
1063:
1040:
1017:
994:
985:
981:
936:
917:
910:
891:
890:
879:
869:
868:
855:
844:Instructions
777:Onegreatjoke
759:
751:
714:
654:
614:
577:
569:
560:
547:
534:
533:
506:
489:
487:
480:
472:
468:
463:
460:
416:
415:
412:Did you know
411:
401:Did you know
399:
391:
390:A fact from
359:
319:
256:
236:
214:
182:
160:
122:19th century
94:WikiProjects
52:
43:please do so
31:
30:
26:
1756:an FA, but
1752:article is
1747:I think it
1705:transcluded
1619:a big thing
1461:my response
1445:questions?
951:word choice
858:transcluded
636:Long enough
599:; consider
579:Created by
406:check views
1833:Categories
1816:TompaDompa
1658:Authorship
1644:GA toolbox
1562:TompaDompa
1533:TompaDompa
1529:WP:ASPECTS
1525:WP:GACRNOT
1485:TompaDompa
1469:WP:GACRNOT
1432:TompaDompa
1373:TompaDompa
1082:No Copyvio
1070:plagiarism
987:verifiable
811:Authorship
797:GA toolbox
771:TompaDompa
692:plagiarism
625:New enough
581:TompaDompa
175:novelettes
37:under the
1780:Vaticidal
1717:Reviewer:
1681:Templates
1672:Reviewing
1637:GA Review
1603:John Gray
1273:Pass/fail
870:Reviewer:
834:Templates
825:Reviewing
790:GA Review
445:Knowledge
396:Main Page
1730:contribs
1686:Criteria
1471:and see
1257:as above
883:contribs
873:Jack4576
839:Criteria
754:: Done.
686:Free of
615:General:
601:watching
561:Reviewed
546:Source:
490:promoted
171:novellas
84:GA-class
47:reassess
1785:prophet
1513:WP:GACR
1473:page 43
1330:Open a
1267:Overall
1126:focused
1066:copyvio
955:fiction
760:Overall
676:Neutral
655:Policy:
570:Comment
514:Comment
494:Bruxton
398:in the
362:on the
217:on the
1467:about
1465:WT:GAN
1424:WT:GAN
1364:WT:GAN
1332:WP:GAR
1208:images
1180:stable
1178:It is
1152:policy
1115:novel.
1091:It is
980:It is
957:, and
947:layout
909:It is
895:review
694:, and
190:Novels
167:novels
118:Sci-fi
113:Novels
90:scale.
54:Review
1707:from
1624:Hoary
1617:made
1243:with
959:lists
897:(see
860:from
725:Cited
715:Hook:
1820:talk
1799:for
1724:talk
1628:talk
1607:Park
1566:talk
1552:talk
1548:Fram
1537:talk
1503:talk
1499:Fram
1489:talk
1479:and
1459:See
1451:talk
1447:Fram
1436:talk
1413:talk
1409:Fram
1392:talk
1377:talk
1354:talk
1350:Fram
1340:talk
1321:talk
1317:Fram
1068:and
984:and
943:lead
941:for
903:here
899:here
877:talk
781:talk
585:talk
518:view
498:talk
177:and
1754:now
1613:'s
1605:'s
1483:."
1463:at
1312:not
1237:b.
1214:a.
1122:b.
1098:a.
1062:d.
1039:c.
1016:b.
993:a.
939:MoS
935:b.
916:a.
752:QPQ
595:at
552:: "
540:by
516:or
492:by
475:or
422:by
354:Low
209:Low
49:it.
1835::
1822:)
1749:is
1732:)
1630:)
1568:)
1554:)
1539:)
1505:)
1491:)
1453:)
1438:)
1426:.
1415:)
1394:)
1379:)
1356:)
1342:)
1323:)
1275::
1269::
1249::
1222::
1188::
1182:.
1160::
1154:.
1130::
1106::
1095:.
1074::
1047::
1043:OR
1024::
1001::
990:.
963::
953:,
949:,
945:,
920::
913:.
893:GA
885:)
783:)
762::
727::
698::
690:,
678::
667::
638::
627::
563::
509:(
500:)
471:,
173:,
169:,
120:/
116::
63:).
1818:(
1727:·
1722:(
1626:(
1564:(
1550:(
1535:(
1501:(
1487:(
1449:(
1434:(
1411:(
1390:(
1375:(
1352:(
1338:(
1319:(
1247:)
1239:(
1220:)
1128:)
1124:(
1104:)
1100:(
1072:)
1064:(
1045:)
1041:(
1022:)
999:)
995:(
961:)
937:(
880:·
875:(
779:(
773::
769:@
583:(
556:"
528:)
496:(
483:.
437:.
366:.
261:.
241:.
221:.
96::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
