Talk:The Magpie (Monet)/GA1

Latest comment: 11 years ago by Viriditas in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 09:26, 7 October 2012 (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):   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):  
  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):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

Only a few issues:

  • Ref 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 31 and 38 do not point to any citation
    • Ref 5, 7, 8, 10 and 11 combined into one ref, 31, 38   Done
  • "French design studio Les 84 created a 3D version of The Magpie for the 2010–2011 Monet exhibition at the Galeries nationales du Grand Palais." suggest adding reference   Done
  • This section is overall a bit small. Is it possible to add more content?--Kürbis () 16:53, 7 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
    • I'm not sure how. That's the only derivative work I've found. I could merge it into another section, add as a footnote, or remove it. Those are my only choices at this point. Viriditas (talk) 13:23, 8 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
      • I think it is not so tragic as is. Merging would be a good choice.--Kürbis () 10:02, 10 October 2012 (UTC)Reply