![]() | The Society I Live in Is Mine 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 6, 2024. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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: AirshipJungleman29 ( talk · contribs) 03:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Starting review. Please consider reviewing another article at WP:GAN. Ping me if I don't get to this by the weekend. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 03:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
I checked several citations, no problems with any of them. Source-text integrity is excellent, with multiple citations often being very nicely combined in the same sentence without WP:SYNTH or plagiarism. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 21:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The biggest weakness of the article is the prose, which is somewhat imprecise (it is also a little verbose, but I think that is beyond the GA criteria). Examples to follow:
Overall, a fair number of prose issues, so I'll put this on hold to let you work them out. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 21:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() | The Society I Live in Is Mine 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 6, 2024. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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: AirshipJungleman29 ( talk · contribs) 03:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Starting review. Please consider reviewing another article at WP:GAN. Ping me if I don't get to this by the weekend. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 03:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
I checked several citations, no problems with any of them. Source-text integrity is excellent, with multiple citations often being very nicely combined in the same sentence without WP:SYNTH or plagiarism. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 21:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The biggest weakness of the article is the prose, which is somewhat imprecise (it is also a little verbose, but I think that is beyond the GA criteria). Examples to follow:
Overall, a fair number of prose issues, so I'll put this on hold to let you work them out. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 21:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)