This is meant to act as a guide for anyone submitting a critique of anything on this site. By following these questions in regards to formalizing the critique, the critic will be providing useful, pertinent, and constructive ideas for the author to consider before revising their work.

Please, be honest with your assessments, but do not go out of your way to tear someone down.

Focus on the work itself, not the author, and contend with the work given, not what you would do, what you think might be a better approach to the work, or your own ideas on the topic (though these suggestions may be included in the “other” section if phrased properly).

Carefully consider what the author is trying to say, the message they want to convey, and the context in which the message is being delivered, then determine if the message is given properly and has the perceived, intended effect on you, as the audience. If it was, say so, and if it was not, say so and why it was not.

Cite specific passages (use quotes, paragraph numbers, page numbers, etc.) to identify the exact locations that a given reaction (positive or negative) occurs at to allow the author a chance to improve on or imitate later. If a passage sends a shiver up your spine and you think it was meant to do so, cite it for that exact reaction. Positive feedback there will provide the author with an example of how they did so in the past. Negative feedback there (like if a passage was obviously meant to make that shiver and did not) will give the author a chance to achieve that shiver in a revision.

Read any work you are going to critique with an open mind. Just because you do not agree with the topic or message does not mean you cannot provide positive feedback. Just because you agree with the topic or message does not mean the work cannot be improved, and your negative feedback (identify a fallacy of logic, for example) could lead to a great strengthening of the work (which you, as a supporter of the topic should want).

Finally, as you read, consider the following questions. Write down specific instances of each as they occur, and then consider them again after the finishing the work (possibly even a second or third time!). Each time you make a response to a given section, try to be as detailed and positive as possible.

Chapter/Work:

What did you really like?

When were you confused?

Was there anything you really disliked?

Were you bored? If so, when?

Did the story live up to your expectations?

Were there problems with grammar, word use, or sentence construction?

Was the dialogue too long or too short? Was it realistic or forced?

Were the characters unique? Did they each have a voice of their own?

Did the characters seem real and have real motives?

Would you recommend this story to a friend?

Do you feel you would have paid to read this?

Other comments: