![]() | Potiki has been listed as one of the
Language and literature good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: February 5, 2024. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from Potiki appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 16 March 2024 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose ( talk · contribs) 01:29, 4 February 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. | |
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. | |
![]() |
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. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | I reviewed the top matches found using Earwig's Copyvio Detector. No issues. Matches were either titles, attributed quotes, or text acceptable per WP:LIMITED e.g. "want Māori to be "treated as a foreign language in its own country" and "published as a Penguin Classic in". No issues found during the review of offline sources for spot checks etc. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | |
![]() |
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. | Reception section is reflective of sources that I've seen. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
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. | FUR in place for the cover image. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Cover image is clearly relevant. There is a CC image of Grace available, but it isn't great quality and I guess many readers here are likely to see it at Grace's article anyway. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
I'm always happy to discuss, or be challenged on, my review comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 01:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
From an initial read, the article looks to be close to meeting the good article criteria.
From what I've seen in sources, I think the breadth and depth are fine for a GA. I'll put the review on hold - happy to allow more than a week for responses if required. Thanks for your work on the article. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 00:00, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
PrimalMustelid
talk
18:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Chocmilk03 ( talk). Self-nominated at 22:13, 5 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Potiki; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
![]() | Potiki has been listed as one of the
Language and literature good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: February 5, 2024. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from Potiki appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 16 March 2024 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose ( talk · contribs) 01:29, 4 February 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. | |
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. | |
![]() |
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. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | I reviewed the top matches found using Earwig's Copyvio Detector. No issues. Matches were either titles, attributed quotes, or text acceptable per WP:LIMITED e.g. "want Māori to be "treated as a foreign language in its own country" and "published as a Penguin Classic in". No issues found during the review of offline sources for spot checks etc. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | |
![]() |
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. | Reception section is reflective of sources that I've seen. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
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. | FUR in place for the cover image. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Cover image is clearly relevant. There is a CC image of Grace available, but it isn't great quality and I guess many readers here are likely to see it at Grace's article anyway. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
I'm always happy to discuss, or be challenged on, my review comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 01:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
From an initial read, the article looks to be close to meeting the good article criteria.
From what I've seen in sources, I think the breadth and depth are fine for a GA. I'll put the review on hold - happy to allow more than a week for responses if required. Thanks for your work on the article. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 00:00, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
PrimalMustelid
talk
18:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Chocmilk03 ( talk). Self-nominated at 22:13, 5 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Potiki; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.