Content deleted Content added
→GA Review: tick |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 9:
Be advised rather than bringing up any minor issues I will just fix them myself. If you're unhappy with any changes I make simply revert them and we can instead discuss the issue here. Also feel free to reply to my concerns as they come in; don't feel like you have to wait for the entire review to be finished. [[User:Freikorp|Freikorp]] ([[User talk:Freikorp|talk]]) 08:18, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
#Is it '''reasonably well written'''? {{GAList/check|?}}
#::'''Lead'''
#::<s>"Community-based program design is a social program design" - two uses of 'program design' within seven words reads poorly.</s>
Line 24:
#:: <s>"are to: 1) recognize" - don't number things like this in standard prose.</s>
#Is it '''factually accurate''' and '''[[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]]'''?
#:A. Has an [[Wikipedia:LAYOUT#Standard_appendices_and_footers|appropriate reference section]]: {{GAList/check|
#::<s>The Sternin source needs to state the publisher and/or journal.</s>
#::<s>The McCawley source looks like it could use more parameters, either the journal or an accessdate.</s>
#::Only one of your book sources states the page number(s) that backs up the statements.
#:::{{ping|Freikorp}} I've found page numbers for most of the sources, but the three sources I couldn't find page numbers for were behind paywalls which didn't allow me to preview the pages I needed. [[User:Philroc|<
#::::Thanks for letting me know. It's not a huge problem, and at least some of them have been found. I'd still be happy to pass this GAN if 3 page numbers were the only outstanding issue. [[User:Freikorp|Freikorp]] ([[User talk:Freikorp|talk]]) 04:20, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
#:B. Citation to reliable sources [[Wikipedia:Good article criteria/where necessary|where necessary]]: {{GAList/check|y}}
Line 54:
#::<s>Regarding the model image - what is this images source? Is it based on information specifically found in source No. 2 (being the only source in the 'Socio-ecological model' sub-section)? I'm not an expert on image licensing, but if it isn't based on a specific source, I think this image would constitute as original research. Also you could probably make a better version of it in a program like [[Microsoft Paint]]. The text doesn't appear to be centered all the way down and there are different spaced gaps between the text and the circles. This isn't a fail point in itself, but I definitely think you can make a better image.</s>
#'''Overall''':
#:Pass or Fail: {{GAList/check|
There are a few issues here. I'm placing this on hold to see if they can be addressed. Even if they all are I may ask for a second opinion as I've never reviewed a 'Social sciences and society' article before and I'm not really sure if all the major aspects have been covered. [[User:Freikorp|Freikorp]] ([[User talk:Freikorp|talk]]) 10:34, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
:{{ping|Freikorp}} I've fixed some of the issues you mentioned, but I'm a bit busy today, so I will start fixing the rest tomorrow. [[User:Philroc|<
::{{ping|Philroc}} I'm happy with the edits made thus far, and you've certainly come a long way since the first GA nomination. Unfortunately it has been over a week and not all of the issues have been addressed. I'll give it another day or two to fix the issues but if its not done soon I'm afraid I'll have to fail this. [[User:Freikorp|Freikorp]] ([[User talk:Freikorp|talk]]) 13:03, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
::{{ping|Philroc}} As mentioned above I can live with you not being able to find 3 page numbers. You don't have much else left to do. If you can't find sources for the un-sourced statements you could consider just deleting them. Though keep in mind that even if you address all the issues I'll probably ask for a second opinion due to obscure subject of this article, and that if you delete all of the un-sourced material a second opinion may find that the article is lacking in content. If I don't hear back from you by tomorrow I'll just close the nomination. [[User:Freikorp|Freikorp]] ([[User talk:Freikorp|talk]]) 07:40, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Jaguar}} Hi there. I was asked to do this review as a trade of sorts and I'm struggling a little as I've never reviewed a cultural GAN before. As you were the reviewer at the first GA nomination, I thought you'd be a good person to ask for a second opinion. If you're too busy though just let me know and I'll consider either just giving it the benefit of the doubt or going through the formal second opinion process. Can you have a brief look at the article and let me know if you see any major issues? In particular I'm at a bit of a loss as to how to determine whether the article is 'broad' in its coverage and covering 'all major aspects' of the topic. Thanks. [[User:Freikorp|Freikorp]] ([[User talk:Freikorp|talk]]) 12:57, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
::::I think this article should be expanded a little, if possible. In my opinion it is just shy of the "broadness" aspect of the GA criteria. Could any more information from the existing sources be squeezed out so it can make the subsections feel less stubby? This is just from a brief read through. I'm afraid I don't have the time to do a proper review of this but it would be great if the "Program design tools" section could be expanded. <span style='font:bold small-caps 0.94em "Nimbus Mono L";color:#000000'>[[User:Jaguar|<span style="color:black;">'''JAG'''</span>]][[User talk:Jaguar|<span style="color:black;">'''UAR'''</span>]]</span> 21:10, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
:::::Thanks so much, I only needed a brief review so that's perfect. I was thinking the same thing - it is just a bit lacking in content for GA. {{u|Philroc}}, do you think you can expand this as per Jaguar's comments before the end of the weekend? Or do you want some more time to work on it (in which case I'll close the nomination and you can renominate it once you've had the time to expand it)? [[User:Freikorp|Freikorp]] ([[User talk:Freikorp|talk]]) 23:51, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
::::::{{ping|Freikorp}} I'll see how my schedule works out. [[User:Philroc|<span style="color:#009933;">Phil</span>]][[User talk:Philroc|<span style="color:#000000;">roc</span>]]<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Philroc|''My contribs'']]</sup> 01:28, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
:::::::No worries. I'm going away for the weekend so won't be able to reply to comments here. I have to draw the line somewhere; if an appropriate, sourced expansion hasn't been made by Monday morning (UTC+10:00) I'll close the nomination. Also don't forget the really long sentence in the lead still needs to be broken up/reworded. [[User:Freikorp|Freikorp]] ([[User talk:Freikorp|talk]]) 14:29, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
:::::::Closing as no further edits have been made to the article. You have done some great work improving the article since the last GA nomination. I'm sure if you apply the same level of improvements again this article will pass a third nomination. [[User:Freikorp|Freikorp]] ([[User talk:Freikorp|talk]]) 03:22, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
| |||