Talk:Campbell's Soup Cans/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Realmaxxver (talk · contribs) 11:52, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this w/ some comments below. Realmaxxver (talk) 11:52, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

• Instant pass on criteria 5: This article's very stable
• There are a lot of citations in this one sentence in the CSI & CSCII section: "An edition of the second set, Campbell's Soup Cans II is part of the permanent collection of the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago.[136][137][138][139][140][141][142][143][144][145]" If anything can be done to cut down the citations that would be cool, because it looks a little bit like WP:OVERCITE in my opinion.
  • That is a set of ten screen prints so I use citations to show that each one is part of the permanent collection of the Museum of Contemporary Art. Should I only cite one of them? Should I move the citations to a footnote?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
    • If you want to keep it as it is that's fine, though I think an extra sentence like this one in the Campbell's Soup Cans II page could work:

"It consists of ten prints: Tomato Beef Noodle O',[5] Chicken 'n Dumplings,[9] Vegetarian Vegetable,[10] Clam Chowder,[11] Old fashioned vegetable made with beef stock,[12] Scotch Broth,[13] Cheddar Cheese,[14] Oyster Stew,[15] Golden Mushroom,[16] and Hot Dog Bean.[17]" Realmaxxver (talk) 18:18, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

• • • • I'd like to keep this on a path towards a future WP:DYK and not mess up the CSCII nomintation. If I add that sentence before CSCII runs at DYK it would make it ineligible as redundant. I might just leave it as is and see how WP:PR, WP:GOCE and WP:FAC feel about it with the latter being most important.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
        • I didn't know that that page has a current DYK nomination. It's fine if you want to keep it like this for now. Realmaxxver (talk) 07:04, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
• Copyvio looks fine, I'm assuming that the Daily Dose of Art page is a website copying from Wikipedia, and not the other way round.

Image review Dead link for Campbell_tomato_soup_ad_1968.jpg— Preceding unsigned comment added by Realmaxxver (talk • contribs) 19:30, November 16, 2023 (UTC)-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:24, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

• I have opened Commons:Village_pump/Copyright/Archive/2023/11#Another_Campbell's_Soup_Cans_image_issue
• Also, now that things have been archived, I can show you the previous discussions we have had about these issues that I thought cleaned up the image issues:
  1. Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions/Archive/2023/October#FUR_issues_at_Campbell's_Soup_Cans
  2. Commons:Village_pump/Copyright/Archive/2023/10#Additional_images_at_w:Campbell's_Soup_Cans
  3. Commons:Deletion requests/File:TAG Andy Warhol Soup Can 02.jpg-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:52, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
• According to the latest discussion, all is resolved.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:15, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
• User:Realmaxxver, what are we waiting on at this point?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:29, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I should get working on this real quick. Realmaxxver (talk) 04:39, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

• I think the images are good. Compared to when this article was first put on FAR, 3 fair use images is much better than 10. Don't see any other issues. Gonna pass on images.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Realmaxxver (talk • contribs) 05:33, November 20, 2023 (UTC)-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

• Ok I'll get finish with this review right now I promise Realmaxxver (talk) 04:58, 22 November 2023 (UTC)?
  • User:Realmaxxver?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:50, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

  Was addressing comments for my own article. I'll get to work now I promise. Realmaxxver (talk) 18:06, 24 November 2023 (UTC).-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:56, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

  User:Realmaxxver, Can I just ask that you finish this up before you do FAC5 with William Utermohlen.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:56, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

  TonyTheTiger Ok. I wasn't even planning on opening FAC5 for like another two weeks. Might take more than two weeks for it to be ready for FAC. Realmaxxver (talk) 10:26, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Criteria 1 and 4

Early life

Didn't find any big issues in this section. I made a few changes there, but the prose is good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Realmaxxver (talk • contribs) 06:25, November 27, 2023 (UTC)-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

• User:Realmaxxver, This is getting to the top of the queue at WP:GOCE. It would be good if this review could be finished before that one starts.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

  Ok. Realmaxxver (talk) 05:53, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

  The GOCE just started. So if there are going to be revisions on your end, please put them on hold. We can get back to this in a month or however long the GOCE takes.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:40, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

  GOCE done.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:51, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

  User:Realmaxxver, I should have pinged you with the prior comment.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:28, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

  TonyTheTiger I've already seen the message. Realmaxxver (talk) 15:42, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

  Shit i'm dumb. I thought you meant the November 28th message. Realmaxxver (talk) 16:59, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

• User:TonyTheTiger, I have decided to pass Campbell's Soup Cans. Realmaxxver (talk) 18:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Overall

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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:
· · ·

Thanks for taking time with this article.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:19, 29 December 2023 (UTC)