Wikipedia:Peer review/Cueva de las Manos/archive1

Cueva de las Manos

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to get the article to GA status. This means making sure that the article is worthy to pass GAN. I'm looking for suggestions, comments and/or contributions that will help to achieve this.

Thank you, Tyrone Madera (talk) 22:31, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

@Tyrone Madera: GAN is more of a collaborative process between the reviewer and nominator, with time included to fix any issues that are brought up. It is far easier than a FAC and few fail. I would encourage you to go ahead and nominate it. The sections (other than lead) are on the shorter side, but if you have included all the available content you can locate, then I wouldn't worry about it too much. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 05:48, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@TheSandDoctor: Thank you for your feedback! I will go ahead and submit the article to GAN then. If you were to review the article as if it were a featured article canidate, how would your feedback change, if at all? Thanks, Tyrone Madera (talk) 20:33, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

I am happy to help, Tyrone Madera! Unfortunately, I am far less experienced with FAs than I am GAs haha. I have a couple I am lining up for FAC runs, but I don’t really have the experience to comment there. What I can say is that my gut tells me it may be too lean…but this is also an area of content I am not the most familiar with standards wise. What I have learned is that FACs have a much higher rate of failure than GAs. I’d recommend directly asking some editors with a lot of FA experience in similar content areas to take a look at it and give you their feedback. If you want to have an FAC peer review, I’d recommend closing this one (or I can if you’d like), filing a new one, and then advertising it to editors who have FA experience in similar content areas (ie invite them to participate). —TheSandDoctor ^Talk