Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
Reply |
||
Line 61:
:::{{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|<font color="black">'''JAG'''</font>]][[User talk:Jaguar|<font color="black">'''UAR'''</font>]]</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)
| |||