The article was promoted by Ucucha 03:12, 23 August 2011 [1].
Maple syrup ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
Introducing the syrup of Sunday mornings, the sweet topping on everything from waffles to ice cream, and the best thing to combine with snow in spring! The article has had a successful GAN and a PR, and I hope to make this one of the very few Food and Drink FAs. Looking forward to any and all comments. Cheers, Nikkimaria ( talk) 18:57, 31 July 2011 (UTC) reply
Sources review
Minimal spotchecks reveal no problems. All sources look good quality, reliable. Brianboulton ( talk) 19:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC) reply
Interesting article. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 12:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC) reply
Good luck
Support - A neat and concise article. Though maple syrup's not the most interesting topic, I found this highly readable. Well done. ceran thor 22:23, 4 August 2011 (UTC) reply
Support Comment This is a really sweet article (couldn't help myself), and I am going to support it now that I have tweaked some wording a little, and you have addressed my comment. but I do have one question/comment. This
source, which is cited by this article in several places, says that the early European settlers switched from the grove cutting method of tapping used by the Native Americans to using augurs to bore holes, because that method did less damage to the tree. This seems like it might be worth mentioning unless some other source I am not aware of disagrees. Otherwise the change from cutting grooves to boring holes is not expained.
Rusty Cashman (
talk) 19:12, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Rusty Cashman (
talk)
03:02, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
reply
Comment. There are a couple of inconsistencies with the sourses that need some quick fixing: the newspaper sources lack publishing and location. While the latter is often omitted, I think the publisher is important. Also, ref 44 is missing the date (dates are listed on the page), as is ref 26. Ref 30 gives the date on the first page. Please check the page title and date for ref 33. Some refs, like ref 58 don't give a date, but list a "last modified" date, which may be used. I'm not sure that the ref set up for a couple of sources are accessible (i.e. easy to find). For example, for ref #2, you have eleven specific points that are all referenced to 2 very broad page ranges (a range of 17 pages: 37–43 and 103–113 from the same book) without saying where a particular point comes from (does the "a" point come from page 37-43 and 103-113, or just 105) etc. Why isn't it set up like the Ellison or Eagleson et al references? A quick google of some of your sources like ref 22, produced a date (missing in your ref), and more complete bibliographic info (fact sheet #). Love the article, though. Concise and well-organized, and with clean prose. Orane (talk) 08:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC) reply
Comments - I agree with earlier comments stating that maple syrup is not the most interesting topic to read about; the article is well written and well sourced, however.
Regretably, I do not have the time to do a more thorough review just now. I intend to in the near future. Micromann ( talk) 06:58, 17 August 2011 (UTC) reply
The article was promoted by Ucucha 03:12, 23 August 2011 [1].
Maple syrup ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
Introducing the syrup of Sunday mornings, the sweet topping on everything from waffles to ice cream, and the best thing to combine with snow in spring! The article has had a successful GAN and a PR, and I hope to make this one of the very few Food and Drink FAs. Looking forward to any and all comments. Cheers, Nikkimaria ( talk) 18:57, 31 July 2011 (UTC) reply
Sources review
Minimal spotchecks reveal no problems. All sources look good quality, reliable. Brianboulton ( talk) 19:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC) reply
Interesting article. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 12:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC) reply
Good luck
Support - A neat and concise article. Though maple syrup's not the most interesting topic, I found this highly readable. Well done. ceran thor 22:23, 4 August 2011 (UTC) reply
Support Comment This is a really sweet article (couldn't help myself), and I am going to support it now that I have tweaked some wording a little, and you have addressed my comment. but I do have one question/comment. This
source, which is cited by this article in several places, says that the early European settlers switched from the grove cutting method of tapping used by the Native Americans to using augurs to bore holes, because that method did less damage to the tree. This seems like it might be worth mentioning unless some other source I am not aware of disagrees. Otherwise the change from cutting grooves to boring holes is not expained.
Rusty Cashman (
talk) 19:12, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Rusty Cashman (
talk)
03:02, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
reply
Comment. There are a couple of inconsistencies with the sourses that need some quick fixing: the newspaper sources lack publishing and location. While the latter is often omitted, I think the publisher is important. Also, ref 44 is missing the date (dates are listed on the page), as is ref 26. Ref 30 gives the date on the first page. Please check the page title and date for ref 33. Some refs, like ref 58 don't give a date, but list a "last modified" date, which may be used. I'm not sure that the ref set up for a couple of sources are accessible (i.e. easy to find). For example, for ref #2, you have eleven specific points that are all referenced to 2 very broad page ranges (a range of 17 pages: 37–43 and 103–113 from the same book) without saying where a particular point comes from (does the "a" point come from page 37-43 and 103-113, or just 105) etc. Why isn't it set up like the Ellison or Eagleson et al references? A quick google of some of your sources like ref 22, produced a date (missing in your ref), and more complete bibliographic info (fact sheet #). Love the article, though. Concise and well-organized, and with clean prose. Orane (talk) 08:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC) reply
Comments - I agree with earlier comments stating that maple syrup is not the most interesting topic to read about; the article is well written and well sourced, however.
Regretably, I do not have the time to do a more thorough review just now. I intend to in the near future. Micromann ( talk) 06:58, 17 August 2011 (UTC) reply