Talk:Bernie Sanders/GA1
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Tortle (talk · contribs) 05:31, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
The main issue to me with this article is the long lead section. It needs to be concise. I will only mark this as a good article if the lead section is shorter in lengh than the infobox to it's right and if someone turns the hitler quote into a block quote. If anyone has any issues with this article that you believe I overlooked, nows the time to let me know so I can add those in. Tortle (talk) 06:29, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Tortle. I'm a bit confused by your suggestions. At least from my point of view, the lead is much shorter than the infobox. Perhaps your screen resolution is lower? Also, the Hitler quote (under "early life and education," correct?) is a blockquote. HappyWanderer15 (talk) 07:39, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- This editor needs more experience before s/he tackles a review. Gandydancer (talk) 10:18, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi HappyWanderer15. I just referred to the infobox to help as a reference point to make it easy to understand how long it should be but ignore what I said because youre right, it changes for everybody. So the main issue with the lead is that an article of this length should have 2-4 lead paragraphs and this has 5. The lead gets too in depth and needs to be shortened. As for experience, I am new but I do have a lot of experience from a few years back when I had a different account. Tortle (talk) 18:24, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- Tortle, you have mentioned experience from a few years back under a different account. Under the circumstances, you need to state what that account was. While it is an issue that the lead is too long—currently six paragraphs rather than three—it is surprising that it's the only criterion that is being mentioned here. I've noticed some others, not the least of which are several references that are bare URLs, which is absolutely not acceptable for a GA. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:27, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
- Note: reviewer has withdrawn at WT:GAN; placing back into reviewing pool for new reviewer, retaining seniority. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:24, 26 August 2015 (UTC)