Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel
This article was provided with references by an Unreferenced articles project volunteer on 2008-10-03. If you edit this page, please build on the good work by citingyour sources.Unreferenced articlesWikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced articlesTemplate:WikiProject Unreferenced articlesUnreferenced articles
1a. In Reception, Publishers Weekly described... and The Library Journal said... — it is the person who wrote the reviews in these publications that "described" or "said" these things, not the publication itself. Perhaps, "The review in Publishers Weekly described..." and "The reviewer for the Library Journal said...".
Fixed.
1b. From the introduction, City at the End of Time was nominated for the Locus Award for Best Science Fiction Novel and the John W. Campbell Memorial Award in 2009. — per WP:LEAD, the intro should only "summarize the body", however this information does not appear anywhere else in the article. I expect to find any award (or bestseller list) mentions in the Reception section.
Done. I've created an "Awards and nominations" section, and added 2 more items I found. I'm not sure whether "Shortlisted" and "Listed" are the correct terms to use.
3b. In Background, the last 2 paragraphs seem to get a little unfocused. I get the point regarding his purposeful connections to those previous works and the relevance of his opinion on those works, but I don't see the relevance of some of it. The quotes about Hodgson's imagination and Irish mysticism seem unnecessary. Also, the relevance of bringing up the topic is vague, "...in City at the End of Time he honors those writers..."; honors how? It isn't until we get to the first paragraph of Analysis section that the connection (how he 'honors' the previous works) between this book and Hodgson's is made. I suggest tightening up those two paragraphs into one (they seem to be discussing the same idea anyways) and maybe clarifying what specifically honors means. Also, the Background could be expanded by clarifying "Hugo and Nebula Award-winner" (for what and when, Hugo for novelette in 1984) and noting when this book was written or when his last book was published.
Almost done. Regarding the text "... he honors those writers ..." in the Background section, this comes from the Locus magazine citation without further explanation; the fact that you say that it is clarified in the Analysis section, makes me wonder whether the Background section should come after the Analysis section. What do you think? But I'll rework the Background section if that's what you'd like.
Thank you for picking up this review. I've attended to most of the issues you raised above – point 3b might still need some work. When you get a chance, please reassess. —Bruce1ee08:44, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I think this part of the Background should be cast as illustrating where Bear is coming from in writing this book (his influences and intentions). The rest can be left for the Analysis (like where he specifically differs from Hogson). Every sentence in that last Background paragraph has the same structure (he "said that"...) which reports what Bear said of Hodgson but doesn't really connect the dots. I'd prefer something more like Bear admired Hodgson's imagination which, in The Night Land, had created "technological preserve" in the far future to keep out monsters that humanity had previously created.maclean (talk) 04:46, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
b (MoS): 
