Talk:Meantime (book)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Unexpectedlydian (talk · contribs) 10:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Hey Bilorv, I'll be reviewing this article using the table below. Comments to follow shortly! Unexpectedlydian♯4talk‽ 10:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Bilorv, I've completed the initial review. A few comments and suggestions are in the table below. Do let me know if you have any questions! Unexpectedlydian♯4talk‽ 17:49, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. |
Lead
Background
Plot
Analysis
Reception
| |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
Lead sections Layout Words to watch
Fiction
List incorporation
| |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. |
| |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). |
Source check
Wilson, Laura (19 August 2022) Anthony, Andrew (31 July 2022) Richardson, Jay (14 September 2022) Merritt, Stephanie (17 July 2022) "Meantime, by Frankie Boyle". Chortle
| |
2c. it contains no original research. |
| |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. |
| |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. |
| |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). |
| |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. |
| |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. |
| |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. |
| |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. |
| |
7. Overall assessment. |
- Thanks for the review, Unexpectedlydian! I've done my best to implement each point, except the two I mention below. I've gone through Reception and I'm sure it could improve further but hopefully it reads better with more sparing quotes.
- I think I prefer the Analysis section without subheadings—they have topic sentences but four paragraphs isn't too long for a section and they're on four different topics that are not the shortest to accurately summarise.
- I don't think there is a great SNP image to use: the logo is a bit underwhelming and no real politicians are mentioned; the reviewers also didn't delve much into the politics of Boyle's treatment of them. I thought about a University of Glasgow image but it's a little superficial as it's mentioned so briefly in the novel; another representative image of Glasgow would be possible but no specific real locations feature heavily in the book. I like the flag but I can take it out if you think it's redundant.
- Let me know if you'd like to come back on anything or if there's any more improvements to make. — Bilorv (talk) 19:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Bilorv, thanks for coming back so quickly! Happy to leave the Analysis section as is. Also happy for the Scotland flag to remain, I don't think it's essential but it does fit with the topic. Thank you for looking at the quotations–maybe some of the sentences could be reworded further, but that's not a GA requirement and very happy for this to be promoted now. Well done! Unexpectedlydian♯4talk‽ 20:24, 22 January 2023 (UTC)