Talk:The Summer Book

GA review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Summer Book/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 12:19, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Vermont (talk · contribs) 01:11, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

This is my first review, and this looks like a very nice article. Please let me know if you have feedback or if I've missed something :) Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 02:37, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Many thanks for taking this on. It's a lovely book for your first review! I'll get to it later today. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:38, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

I am stepping in as part of the June 2026 Good Article backlog drive as an Experienced Reviewer to help where I can. I have had a very positive experience previously working with the nominator on GA reviews and so am looking forward to this one. simongraham (talk) 18:47, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

simongraham, all good on my end, could you take a look at my review? Chiswick Chap, thank you for putting up with my comments, this is a very nice article that does justice to its subject and I've enjoyed the opportunity to review it. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 14:42, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: Vermont I note a couple of points on citations. Firstly, there is a citation in the middle of the plot summary. I suggest either sourcing all of the summary or none. I also suggest reviewing it in light of WP:PLOTSUM. Secondly, the paragraph that starts "The novelist Ali Smith" has multiple consecutive citations to the same source. I recommend removing all but the last. It may also be worth noting that Earwig highlights the text in The Guardian and LA Times as possible copyright violations based on the quotes in the text. Obviously, this is still compliant with No WP:CV. Otherwise, I believe you have captured everything. simongraham (talk) 20:33, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

All done as requested, and noted. I had repeated the citation for each direct quotation. Chiswick Chap (talk) 01:38, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Vermont, I think we are complete here now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 01:39, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Great! @simongraham, am I all set to proceed with the passing steps? Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 03:53, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

@Vermont: I believe so. Thank you for all your excellent work, Chiswick Chap. simongraham (talk) 14:08, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

+1, thanks Chiswick Chap, a great article that made for a delightful first review. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 18:13, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Comments

• by the Finland-Swedish author Tove Jansson – here, Finland-Swedish is an article about a variety of the Swedish language, and not a group of people. Would Swedish-speaking population of Finland be a more appropriate link target? Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 02:37, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

  Linked.

• dealing indirectly with the theme of death – I wonder if there's a word better than indirectly to use here, or a qualifier we can add. It could be read to imply that death is a secondary theme, which would disagree with Rayner's view that the underlying theme is death. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 02:37, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

  Said "principal theme"; "indirectly" is correct as the d-word is barely mentioned.

• In the latest reading, – MOS:RELTIME, probably a different way to introduce this. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 02:37, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

  Edited; but note that the MoS is talking about calendar time, not an individual reviewer's personal experience.

  Yes, though if this author is correct that they read the book every summer, latest would not be referring to the 2023 reading that is described in the article. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 12:08, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

  Guess they're using the word slightly colloquially. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:32, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Vermont, you need to do some spot-checks, which means that you take a sample of the 24 references, say 4 or 5 of them, and check that they actually say what the article claims they do. For instance you might verify that [6] Jaggi says that Sophia Jansson is the model for the girl. You then write "* [6] ok" or words to that effect. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:53, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap, yes! I also have a lot of other things to do, sorry if I gave the impression these were my only comments :>. I plan on working on this over the next 2-3 days; if it's preferred, I can ping you once I've completed. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 12:07, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm watching the page already. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:26, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

• and that with her worldwide fame, she knew the virtues of withdrawal – might just be me, but I'm not really sure what this implies. Is it "virtues of withdrawal" in the sense of there being virtue to periodically stepping back from her "worldwide fame"? I also notice that the "virtues of withdrawal" phrase is used directly in Smith's review, I'm not sure if it'd be better to place in quotes or keep directly in prose. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 04:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  Quotation marks added.

• The longer quote from Smith is 80 words. I think it's a really great inclusion, though am wondering if it would be worth formatting in a blockquote? Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 04:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  It's a matter of taste. I prefer to have Smith as a single coherent paragraph.

• Tolerance and care for nature were essential virtues. – it might be useful to contextualize this, as it's unclear to me whether this is a description of the characters' "own sort of 'normality'" (from prev sentence) or refers to something else. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 04:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  all related. Edited.

• made the audience long for something a little more risky – do we get more than this from the source? (I don't seem to have access, unfortunately) I'm unsure whether the audience reaction should be read as a "the production wasn't risky enough" or "omg now I want more". Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 04:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  The former; edited.

Notes

• Edit history is very stable. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 04:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
• Images: relevant, well-placed, and licensing for all three looks good. File:Signe-Hammarsten-Jansson.jpg is PD, File:Sophia Jansson 01.JPG appropriately licensed by the uploader/photographer, and File:Sommarboken.jpg (the book cover) has an appropriate fair use rationale. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈)
• Source spot-checks as numbered in this diff: 2, 4, 9, 19, and 21. Everything verifies, no closepara/copyvio concerns. In general, no reliability concerns with the sources. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 04:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
• No OR/SYNTH/NPOV concerns. Vermont (🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 04:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC)