Jump to content

Talk:Mince pie/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 01:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:07, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    ... where Roman fathers in the Vatican were presented with sweetmeats. Do you mean Roman Catholic priests? If so, please ay so.
    Done.
    OK, but now we have a contradiction. Saturnalia was an Ancient Roman feast. The Vatican is the headquartres of the Roman Catholic church. Why would Roman catholics celebrate Saturnalia?
    The article does not suggest that Roman catholics celebrated Saturnalia. That said, to avoid confusion, I have changed it back to "fathers", which is the word used in the source.
    The precise quote is: "Minced pies were derived from the paste images and sweetmeats given to the Fathers of the Vatican at Rome on Christmas Eve". No mention of Saturnalia there, so that needs to be changed.
    The modern Mince pie's precursor was known by several names. lower case "mince"
    Done.
    Today the mince pie remains a popular Christmas treat, although as the modern recipe is no longer the same list of 13 ingredients once used (according to author Margaret Baker, representative of Christ and his 12 Apostles), it lacks the religious meaning contained therein Does this mean Margaret Baker is the "representative of Christ and his 12 Apostles". Please rephrase to clarify.
    I don't think that needs clarifying. Nobody is going to presume that Margaret Baker is the representative of Christ et al.
    It does need clarifying, please remember that not all readers have English as their first language. Suggest rephrasing: "according to author Margaret Baker, the thirteen ingredients are representative of Christ and his 12 Apostles" Would also be useful to mention the chopped mutton "in remembrance of the "shepherds"
    The criteria here is that the prose is "clear and concise". The sentence is exactly that and I will not be changing it. It is absurd to suggest that someone may presume that the author of a modern book is somehow representative of a holy scene.
    Precisely, so I suggest rewording as: "although as the modern recipe is no longer the same list of 13 ingredients once used, which were, according to author Margaret Baker, representative of Christ and his 12 Apostles."
    The lead does not fully summarize the article, please check out WP:LEAD. It also contains information that is not in the body of the article itself.
    What information exactly? Parrot of Doom 09:18, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    My mistake, or perhaps has been clarified by recent edits. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:37, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    References appear to be RS, check out, no OR
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Needs a typical modern recipe, referenced of course.
    I don't think it does. The article already implies that the mince pie is made from fruit, spices, sugar, suet and pastry. A modern recipe doesn't really add anything new.
    I think that a direct comparison, within the article of the the earlier recipes with modern would be beneficial to the understanding of the subject. A "typical" modern recipe would be extremely useful for this.
    That would be original research. There is no set recipe for a mince pie, but what remains is broadly similar to that used hundreds of years ago, minus of course any flesh.
    Could do with something about modern practice, commercialization, stats of bakery and supermarket sales perhaps? A section on current practice, etc. would be good.
    I don't have any industry-wide stats for the sale of mince pies. Doubtless they're in the millions, but I believe this is adequately covered by "popular Christmas treat". Parrot of Doom 09:18, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    We are looking for "broad" coverage here, so a little more than "popular Christmas treat" is needed for the 20/21st century. As it stands the article focusses more on the history thatn anything else and so it is unbalanced. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:37, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Broad coverage - "(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)". Parrot of Doom 10:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  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):
    Images check out, but I think moving File:William henry hunt christmas pie.jpg to the right would improve the layout
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    On Hold for seven days for these issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, we have a disagreement here so I shall ask for a second opinion on whether there should be more about modern mince pies. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    It has become clear that the nominator is resistant to the constructive good faith criticism and suggestions that have been made, so I shall close this review as "not listed". Please feel free to request a reassessment of the article or consider improvements before re-nominating at WP:GAN. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am a Wikipedia novice so please excuse any flagrant formatting errors. I came to this page curious to see exactly what is in a modern mince pie, and was surprised to see that information deliberately omitted. This does strike me as pretty fundamental information - granted you can kind of sort of piece it together by reading the whole article, but that's not particularly friendly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drake lazarus (talkcontribs) 18:54, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Second opinion[edit]

  1. I'll provide a 2nd opinion. Gave me time for a read through and for research :-D --Philcha (talk) 11:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Many thanks Philcha. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:29, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "from an old Roman custom practised during Saturnalia, where Roman fathers in the Vatican were presented with sweetmeats" is ambiguous, as Saturnalia started in 217 BC. Vatican (a DAB page) shows that "Vatican" is also ambiguous. Timbs says, ""Minced pies were derived from the paste images and sweetmeats given to the Fathers of the Vatican at Rome on Christmas Eve" - no Saturnalia. --Philcha (talk) 12:56, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]