GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Abhilasha369 ( talk · contribs) 02:54, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
This article would certainly pass as a good article. The only issue is the so called charge of "recentism" in the "crisis of 2011" section. Done
Maybe in the introduction section, a sentence can be mentioned about the price stability duty of the ECB. Though this is a subset of "administering monetary policy", it would be nice to categorically mention it. Apart from these two things, everything seems good. Done
Abhilasha369 (
talk)
02:54, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Regards Abhilasha369 ( talk) 15:14, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Abhilasha369 ( talk) 15:50, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
– Plarem ( User talk contribs) 15:04, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Yes, a mentor is a great idea. I've already spoken to someone about it. Awaiting response. Till then, maybe you can work on improving the article with more citations. Abhilasha369 ( talk) 15:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
But, how come you put Stability at Neutral? – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 17:03, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I've been asked to take a look at this article. I'll leave some comments later tonight or tomorrow. Protonk ( talk) 03:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
I hope all this helps. Protonk ( talk) 17:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Clearly, the following aspects need to be improved:
So once the "On Hold" time expires, I will read the article again hoping the above problems have been sorted out. Thank you Protonk, you're an awesome mentor! All the best, Plarem. You've got some edits to make.
Regards - Abhilasha369 ( talk) 14:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I have noticed that you've made a few edits and added some references. However, the references are still inadequate for an article of this importance! For example, the European sovereign debt crisis section is anyway a contentious issue and it has (on an average) one reference per paragraph, whereas every sentence should be referenced. And besides, there are so many news references to this subject, so it's not as if its an obscure topic.
Abhilasha369 ( talk) 05:42, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't know that every sentence should be referenced. Every contentious claim or potentially dubious claim should be referenced. I'm happy with the article right now (so long as someone takes out the tags on the crisis section, if they are no longer warranted), but the decision to pass is up to you. Protonk ( talk) 22:13, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Is the comparison to the ECB's conterpart, the U.S. Fed Reserve necessary in this article? Sure, anyone can just go onto the United States Federal Reserve article on Wikipedia. Is this necessary? – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 20:07, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Can it be okay top add copyrighted photos to the article? -- Mohamed Aden Ighe ( talk) 21:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
I think this article meets the GA criteria now. It should be passed. Best Abhilasha369 ( talk) 09:22, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank-you for reviewing it. – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 10:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
You do realise that you need to change the template on the top of the talk page and place {{Good article}} on top of the talk page as described on WP:GAN. – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 10:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Nvm, I'll do it myself... – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 11:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Abhilasha369 ( talk · contribs) 02:54, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
This article would certainly pass as a good article. The only issue is the so called charge of "recentism" in the "crisis of 2011" section. Done
Maybe in the introduction section, a sentence can be mentioned about the price stability duty of the ECB. Though this is a subset of "administering monetary policy", it would be nice to categorically mention it. Apart from these two things, everything seems good. Done
Abhilasha369 (
talk)
02:54, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Regards Abhilasha369 ( talk) 15:14, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Abhilasha369 ( talk) 15:50, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
– Plarem ( User talk contribs) 15:04, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Yes, a mentor is a great idea. I've already spoken to someone about it. Awaiting response. Till then, maybe you can work on improving the article with more citations. Abhilasha369 ( talk) 15:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
But, how come you put Stability at Neutral? – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 17:03, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I've been asked to take a look at this article. I'll leave some comments later tonight or tomorrow. Protonk ( talk) 03:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
I hope all this helps. Protonk ( talk) 17:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Clearly, the following aspects need to be improved:
So once the "On Hold" time expires, I will read the article again hoping the above problems have been sorted out. Thank you Protonk, you're an awesome mentor! All the best, Plarem. You've got some edits to make.
Regards - Abhilasha369 ( talk) 14:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I have noticed that you've made a few edits and added some references. However, the references are still inadequate for an article of this importance! For example, the European sovereign debt crisis section is anyway a contentious issue and it has (on an average) one reference per paragraph, whereas every sentence should be referenced. And besides, there are so many news references to this subject, so it's not as if its an obscure topic.
Abhilasha369 ( talk) 05:42, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't know that every sentence should be referenced. Every contentious claim or potentially dubious claim should be referenced. I'm happy with the article right now (so long as someone takes out the tags on the crisis section, if they are no longer warranted), but the decision to pass is up to you. Protonk ( talk) 22:13, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Is the comparison to the ECB's conterpart, the U.S. Fed Reserve necessary in this article? Sure, anyone can just go onto the United States Federal Reserve article on Wikipedia. Is this necessary? – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 20:07, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Can it be okay top add copyrighted photos to the article? -- Mohamed Aden Ighe ( talk) 21:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
I think this article meets the GA criteria now. It should be passed. Best Abhilasha369 ( talk) 09:22, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank-you for reviewing it. – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 10:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
You do realise that you need to change the template on the top of the talk page and place {{Good article}} on top of the talk page as described on WP:GAN. – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 10:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Nvm, I'll do it myself... – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 11:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC)