Talk:History of Scotland/GA1

Latest comment: 5 years ago by EggRoll97 in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: EggRoll97 (talk · contribs) 15:00, 21 July 2018 (UTC)Reply


GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):  
    b (citations to reliable sources):  
    c (OR):  
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):  
    b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  

Overall:
Pass/Fail:  

  ·   ·   ·  


Plagiarism? edit

I got a 99.4% match for plagarism from this link. Care to elaborate? EggRoll97 (talk) 04:51, 23 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Take a look at the site that came up positive on the plagiarism search and then think about who copied who - I think it is pretty obvious!! [1] Is anyone volunteering to contact them and suggest that they acknowledge Wikipedia rather than take all the credit for themselves?
ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 08:18, 23 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
@ThoughtIdRetired: Nevermind, now that I look it again, it's a bit suspicious that a tour website would have a Wikipedia-style description of Scotland. EggRoll97 (talk) 08:28, 23 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
@EggRoll97: Thanks for reviewing – yeah, that's clearly plagiarism on their part rather than ours. A quick look at the page history shows that the prose was composed by several users over several years - plagiarising that website so slowly with so many sockpuppets would arguably have been a greater effort than just creating new prose, haha! --Newbiepedian (talk · C · X! · L) 00:13, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Review Finished edit

With that, I've finished this review. Thanks to everyone, and congratulations! EggRoll97 (Let's talk!) 00:23, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply