Talk:The Cat in the Hat Comes Back

The Cat in the Hat Comes Back has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: March 18, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Children's literature Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks you can do:

Here are some open tasks for WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to create and standardize articles related to children's literature. Feel free to help with any of the following tasks.

Add {{Portal|Children's literature}} to the See also section of related articles.
Tag the talk pages of related articles with {{WikiProject Children's literature}}
Join WikiProject Children's literature and list yourself as a Participant in the project.
Cleanup: A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.
Deletion discussions: listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature
Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
Rate the Unassessed articles in the Children's literature WikiProject.
References: Add references to Unreferenced BLPs.
Requested articles: Create a requested article on literature
Stubs: Improve a stub-class article

edit

Symbolism

Since the book was written in the late 1950's, has anyone suggested that the spreading pink ink in an uncontrolled house represents the spread of Communism, and the "Voom" in the tiniest cat's hat represents atomic energy?108.225.17.141 (talk) 05:37, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Cancelled" sequel

Yes, various editors have frequently added that the sequel was cancelled and -- variously -- that Audrey Geisel made this decision based on either the film's poor reception or that she was offended/appalled by the film.

The only source we have, however, says none of this. No cancelled sequel. She wasn't offended or appalled. She didn't order anything. The source simply states she didn't think Myers was right for the role and "The movie was judged by some critics as the worst of 2003, she notes. Geisel says she will never again allow Hollywood to portray Seuss characters in live action. An animated work based on the elephant character Horton will be the next film project."

If you want to say more than that, you will need another source. - SummerPhD^v2.0 19:04, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rivas

Xiomara 190.237.120.36 (talk) 17:20, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

Passed. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 01:58, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The 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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Cat in the Hat Comes Back/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 21:29, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Rjjiii (talk · contribs) 03:24, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, snap! I looked this up because I watched a nonverbal kid recently use this book to reprimand his siblings for pouring sand on the floor; I think he was comparing them to The Cat in the Hat. I'll start a review soon. Let me know if there is anything in particular that you would like feedback on, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 03:24, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Spot-checking

The references are WP:RS and cited in a clear way. The footnotes are numbered as in this version of the page: 6 March 2025

fn. 1 Verified, no issues.
fn. 7 Verifed, no issues.
fn. 10 Verified, no issues.
fn. 28 Verified, no issues.
fn. 33 Verified, no issues.
fn. 46 Verified. It's ambiguous in the cited article whether Audrey Geisel is upset with the critical or commercial failure, but in articles that quote her words, she is clearly upset with the critical failure as well as personally disgusted with Mike Meyers.

Images

File:The Cat in the Hat Comes Back Cover.jpg has an appropriate fair-use tag.

I checked the commons and didn't see any usable free images at a glance, although many people seem to have uploaded photographs of their cats wearing a hat.

Lead

"cleans all of the pink stain" This is somewhat awkward. There are few ways to word it, maybe "cleans up all of the pink stain" or "cleans away the pink stain".
"The children are quicker to confront the Cat compared to the first book" I think this is a really clear, objective, and academic way to say that they were keen to his bullshit after the last time he came over. No issues, just making note that the wording works well

Plot

"in a tub." Maybe something like "in their bathtub." would be more clear. Tub is ambiguous, and some countries shorten the other direction to "bath".
"The Cat tries new methods" Something like "various methods" or "a series of methods" would be more clear. If we take the Cat at his word, none of the methods are new but rather proven effective.
"Cat lifts his hat" Why switch from "The Cat" to "Cat"?
"the microscopic Little Cat Z" I really like this way to phrase it. No problems just noticing it's nice.
Voom isn't explained in the article. I know it's not it the story either. Is there some way that the article can make a note of that though?

Writing and publication

"La Jolla" Can we specify La Jolla, California?
"Geisel discarded six drafts" Do the sources note anything that was cut?
"the final draft used" If this is the published draft wouldn't it be "uses"?
"Geisel made use of S-shaped curves ..." This sentence feels out of place in a paragraph otherwise about language and readability.
"Geisel went on a tour for book signing" This bit reads awkwardly.

Literary analysis

"circularity found in the works of Dr. Seuss" This would be more clear with a one-sentence explanation of what circularity means to Einhorn.
"Feminist professor Naomi Goldenberg symbolized" This grammar seems odd. Goldenberg is saying that the removal symbolized, right?
"The Cat in the Hat Comes Back was published amid the Red Scare,..." This would flow more naturally following "...at the time of publication." as both are about the same idea.
"The mother and father have separate bedrooms in the characters' home." Do the sources comment on why Seuss depicts it this way? I vaguely remember old television shows also depicting parents with separate beds.

Reception and legacy

"inferior to the first" Do the sources comment on why?
"Instead, the Cat was used in a variety of other projects" Do the sources comment on how this came to be? Earlier in the article it mentioned that Geisel was reluctant to write the sequel. Were these his ideas? Were they a compromise? Do we know if he was ever asked to a sequel?

External links

These are out of the scope for a GA review. I just wanted to note that these are literally the things that I was looking for when looking up.

Comments

This was mostly pretty straightforward. I didn't find any significant issues. Feel free to ask any questions, or {{ping}} me the article feels ready, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:38, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rjjiii Regarding what was cut from the drafts, there are already a few details lower in the article where it covers analysis of the climax and how Seuss changed it. The sources don't say why specifically it didn't receive the acclaim of the first one or why he appeared in other projects but not a sequel. I've made changes based on all of the other notes above (and rearranged the Voom/communism stuff so it's in its own paragraph). And you were right; the source explained that the separate bedrooms came after the television bedrooms. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 00:19, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, looks good, and yeah where the sources don't say anything, then there is nothing for us to say. I'm going to double-check the article and pass the review later tonight, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 00:45, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.