Talk:Family in advertising/GA2

GA Reassessment

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

Starts GA Reassessment. The reassessment will follow the same sections of the Article. Hopefully the review will begin soon. --Whiteguru (talk) 07:33, 2 May 2021 (UTC) Thank you

---

Result: Delisted. Legitimate concerns, no opposition or improvements made --Whiteguru (talk) 01:15, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

 

Instructions: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment

 

---

Observations

• Internet Archive bot was run on this page; 9 references were linked to archives.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

• Reference 3 goes to the front page of Project Muse, not the article.
• Reference 4 is a dead link
• Reference 15, 16, 17, 20, 22 are dead links. The IA bot has been run on the page. These are likely permanent dead links.

1. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

• The family symbol in advertising is presumptive. Use of images of family are signs, painting, not symbols. There are repeated references to the family as symbol.
• The History section is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay
• The main paragraph (para 3) of the Function section is an argumentative essay and does not present facts. It is arguing about consumer buying behaviour

1. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

• This article is written as an essay and seeks to promote the role of family in advertising. It is not written as an encyclopedic article. There is no inherent neutrality in the article.

1. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

• This article has been created and curated by two SPA accounts. See here and here.

1. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

• 7 Up - You like it, it likes you, 1948.jpg = This image was taken from Flickr's The Commons
• Cheney's expectorant.jpg = is in the public domain in the United States. This applies to U.S. works where the copyright has expired, often because its first publication occurred prior to January 1, 1926
• Hacovon Liquid Soap 1920.jpg = Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.

1. Overall:

• This article has multiple issues: the tags below need resolution, the article needs significant rewriting. It is likely to lose GA status. --Whiteguru (talk) 08:13, 2 May 2021 (UTC)