Talk:Pioneer Courthouse Square Christmas tree/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Matthew Yeager (talk) 05:51, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: Another Believer (talk · contribs) 03:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Matthew Yeager (talk · contribs) 19:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a look at this today and I have the time to commit to completing the review over the next few days. Matthew Yeager (talk) 19:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing! Happy to address concerns if you have any. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:44, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review Feedback

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

Well written and referenced, with a neutral tone. Three overall points to discuss and a few cleanup items.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

Lead Section - 2010 Car Bomb Plot focus

The follow up in article could be condensed into the lead section. Lead update: "In 2010, a Somali-American student plotted to set off a car bomb at the ceremony, and was subsequently arrested in an FBI sting." Remove from article body. Add to See also.

I've updated the lead sentence, but I would prefer not to remove mention of the incident from the article body altogether. Plus, the lead is meant to summarize the article body, so we shouldn't mention the event only in the lead and the See also section. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Trees" Section

Sentences rely on their relative placement to each other to make sense. In reading the section, you must keep referencing information from previous sentences. For instance:

"The 2011 tree was the same height", "The same number of lights were used in 2012.", "In 2015, a Douglas fir of the same size", "A 70-foot-tall tree from the same area was used in 2018", "The 2022 tree of the same height", "In 2024, the approximately 35-year-old tree of the same size and type".

Section conveys stats which may be meaningful to readers, but difficult to maintain the flow while reading. Is this something you would consider presenting as a table with Year, Height, Weight, Lights, Region?

I thought about creating a table, but found this to be more difficult than one might expect because in some cases dimensions are given for the tree before cutting, other times as presented at Pioneer Courthouse Square after cutting. I've tried to capture the details without being too repetitive, but I can acknowledge this section might not have the best flow. I would be fine with how editors help summarize the information over time, but I hope not having a table won't disqualify the entry from being promoted. When I do use phrases like "same area", "same height", etc, I am always basing that language on the previous sentence, However, I think a couple line breaks interrupted that flow, so I've removed those. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 03:01, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling/Grammer

"KGW broadcast an hour-long special with a sing-along led by Pink Martini in 2020." -> broadcasted

Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

Reference 27 is an editorial covering one of the more controversial aspects of the article. I couldn't find any other reference to the event, which has me wonder about the notability. I see it was added to Lars Larson on 24 November 2008, and that a self-published reference was removed. Are you able to find more reliable references or perhaps remove the section?

Removed No prob! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:42, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 43 relates to 3 citations, however the third citation is a reference to the first. Please remove the third citation as duplicate.

Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:38, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Excellent coverage of the tree, festivities, and annual event while keeping an overall focus.

Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Great use of tree photos over time, including many added by the author.
Like ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

@Matthew Yeager: I think I've responded to your initial round of feedback. Happy to continue discussing as needed! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 03:05, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your consideration, responses, and edits. The points related to the prose and references have been addressed and I'm happy you were able to share your thoughts on the table vs sentences. Matthew Yeager (talk) 05:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.