Talk:Zapiekanka/GA1

GA Review

Reviewer: Carbrera (talk · contribs) 21:14, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I am Carbrera, and I'll be reviewing this article for possible good article submission.

Full review coming very soon. Carbrera (talk) 21:14, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Infobox

• Perhaps the alt for the image could better describe the dish; perhaps say what is on the zapiekanka (cheese, mushrooms, etc.)
  • Done. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
• Is ketchup an absolutely essential ingredient? Is not; please move that to the 'minor ingredient' list portion
  • Done. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Lead

• Is the 'A' necessary before 'zapiekanka'?
  • Would the sentence be grammatically correct without it? "Zapiekanka" is not a proper noun, so I'd think an article is necessary. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Got it. Carbrera (talk) 00:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

• The 'optionally other ingredients' part reads awkwardly; could this be rephrased for better coherence?
  • Changed "optionally" to "sometimes". — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Etymology

• Insert a comma after 'combine'
  • Done. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
• Remove 'any of' in the sentence 'and may refer to any of various casseroles...'
  • Done. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
• The last sentence sorta indicates WP:OR; please provide a source for this statement and remove 'as used in this article' for better coherence
  • Removed "as used in this article". I will try to find a citation for this statement. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Let me know when you do Carbrera (talk) 00:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Preparation and varieties

Paragraph 1

• Replace 'classic no-frills' with 'typical'
  • Done. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
• I get that this lead sentence is factual, but no source backs up what you're trying to convey
  • Inline citations added. — Kpalion^(talk) 22:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
• Again, the second sentence does not have a source either
  • I don't know what you mean. A citation is provided at the end of the second sentence. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

I meant the third sentence, my mistake Carbrera (talk) 00:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

• And again, the final sentence doesn't have a source either
  • Inline citations added. — Kpalion^(talk) 22:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Paragraph 2

• The second sentence indicates WP:OR; remove this sentence altogether please
  • Inline citation added. I admit it's not a great source, but, per WP:USERG, "a lightweight source may sometimes be acceptable for a lightweight claim". — Kpalion^(talk) 22:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

I'd put quotation marks around "soggy" and "tasteless" as they still sound like opinions Carbrera (talk) 00:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

• The remainder of this section is pretty good

History

Paragraph 1

• In the beginning of this section as a whole, there are very few sources to back up what is being said; I'm sure you could find a few to put in here to make your statements credible
  • All of the information provided in the first part of this paragraph is backed by Chwalba and TVP Info. I don't think it's necessary to repeat the same citation after every sentence. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Just checked the source; I see what you mean. Carbrera (talk) 00:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

• The last sentence could be condensed while still providing the same overall message
  • It reads well to me as it is. Do you have a specific suggestion for rewirting it? — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

I guess it's fine after reading it again. Carbrera (talk) 00:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Paragraph 2

• The lead sentence again sounds a bit bias; rephrase please
  • Again, do you have a specific suggestion on how to rephrase it? I can't tell which way this is biased. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

How do you know demand fell for the food? How do you know it remained on the menu? Rephrasing isn't necessary if a source is provided for these statements. Carbrera (talk) 00:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

• The 'cult following' sentence needs a source to back up such a heavy statement
  • I'll try to add a source for this. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
• The 'nightlife' hub' sentence needs a source as well
  • I'll try to add a source for this. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

References

• I'm confused as to why there are two separate sections for the exact same thing; the 'Sources' section needs to be combined with this for a better flow
  • This article uses shortened footnotes, which requires separate sections for footnotes and full citations. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Got it. Carbrera (talk) 00:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

• Is there an available template to add to this page? The ending looks rather bland
  • I don't think the use of end-of-page templates is a GA requirement. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

I know it's not, but a majority of food-related articles have a template. I was just asking if you knew of one to place in this article. Carbrera (talk) 00:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

End of GA Review:

A very decent article, but some improvements need to be made before passing GA. I'm gonna place this article on hold until the nominator has a chance to look through my comments. I hope I wasn't too strict in this review; I just want the article to be at its best before passing. Thanks. Carbrera (talk) 21:34, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to review this article, Carbrera. I've made most of the stylistic corrections that you suggested. I will need a little more time to add citations where they are missing. Please see my replies to your individual comments above. — Kpalion^(talk) 11:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Looks good, just let me know when you find and add any additional citations. Carbrera (talk) 00:29, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

@Kpalion: Notice: You have one day left to make any additional changes to the article before I review it again. Carbrera (talk) 01:45, 27 March 2016 (UTC)