Talk:R/place/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Kingsif (talk · contribs) 00:00, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Kingsif, and I'll be doing this review. This is an automated message that helps keep the bot updating the nominated article's talkpage working and allows me to say hi. Feel free to reach out and, if you think the review has gone well, I have some open GA nominations that you could (but are under no obligation to) look at. Kingsif (talk) 00:00, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

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

• PD logo and fair use image of artwork in question

Could you point out specifically what’s wrong with them? I am not overly familiar with fair use laws, but they seem fine to me. WackyWikiWoo (talk) 03:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with them. This is a comment that says that... Kingsif (talk) 05:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I misinterpreted- thought “in question” meant “in doubt”. WackyWikiWoo (talk) 08:38, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

• Well written throughout
• I would change the heading 'Overview' to 'Experiment'

 Done WackyWikiWoo (talk) 03:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

• "colourful" in wiki voice is in British English - is there a reason for this?

 Fixed WackyWikiWoo (talk) 03:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

• Expand "FEE" to "Foundation for Economic Education"

 Done WackyWikiWoo (talk) 03:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

• Is the FEE quotation directly lifted, because I think the verb "characterize" should actually be "characterizes"? This is a simple fix

This was directly lifted- the source used “characterize”. I’ve modified the quotation to include the s using square brackets. WackyWikiWoo (talk) 03:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

• Talk page and history look clear enough
• Is IB Times (currently [5]) a reliable source for the list (and is it needed, since there's a bunch of other sources for this part?)

 Removed WackyWikiWoo (talk) 03:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

• The lead might be a bit long, and I'd move the canvas dimensions and date down into the experiment overview section. Maybe some other stuff could also be moved into the body, giving a better balance?

I’ve moved the dimensions down, but I think cutting the lead anymore will hinder its purpose to summarise the article’s main points. WackyWikiWoo (talk) 03:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

• copyvio check looks fine, and inline citations used well.

Overall

• on hold A few things, mostly minor clean-up. Kingsif (talk) 00:08, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

• Looks good. Kingsif (talk) 20:00, 21 April 2020 (UTC)