Talk:Tolkien and antiquarianism/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs)
Reviewer: Heavy Grasshopper (talk · contribs) 16:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Good afternoon. I'll be reviewing the article. This is my first review, but I'll try to complete it fairly promptly this week and let you know what changes, if any, are required, in the next couple of days. Comments to follow in the table.Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 16:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Heavy Grasshopper, many thanks for taking this on. If you're unsure of the GAN process at any point, feel free to ask me or the folks over on the GAN discussion page. If any comments are at all long (i.e. more than 'OK') then it generally works best to list them outside (before) the table, as it gets tricky trying to edit a lot of discussion threads inside the table structure. The key to a review is to make a list of comments to which I'll reply; I'm used to working through even quite serious comments (nearly anything can be fixed with a bit of effort). In this case I created the article, so I know the sources are solid. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Chiswick Chap . I hope you won't find the comments too tiresome in that I did put them into the table. I felt that they were all quite minor, with the possible exception of my request for more context on Tolkien himself. I know his main biographical article is linked on the context section, but I wonder if a few sentences in the context section with a quote or two from scholars) on Tolkien himself, his life as it relates to his interest in antiquarianism, and any likely motivation for using it in his works, would be good. I think knowing more about these things would help the general reader with understanding the context of his use of antiquarian elements in his works.
- I do think that would all fall under the scope of this article and better fulfil criterion 3a.Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 13:14, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick response and edits. Happy to pass this now.Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 14:41, 19 March 2024 (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. |
|
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Fine. |
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. | Verifiable information, well sourced. |
![]() |
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). |
|
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | Looking at the sources available to me, I do not detect any OR. Scholars are cited properly in appropriate context. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | I did not detect any copyright violations or plagiarism. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Generally everything is well addressed in depth.
|
![]() |
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. | Vast majority of edits by nominator. No sign of edit-warring or disputes. |
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. | Fair use cases seem reasonable, copyrighted images are used in poor resolution. Acceptable per WP:NFCI. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Relevant and suitably described. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |