Talk:Bit House Saloon/GA1

GA Review

Passed. (Done on behalf of other reviewer). Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 01:07, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: SyntheticSystems (talk · contribs) 21:49, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.^[1]

Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) 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);^[2]

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;^[3] and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

^[4]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

^[5]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.^[6]

Review

Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	Prose is good.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	No MoS violations.	Pass

I've promoted approximately 50 restaurant articles to Good status and they all follow the format of Description, History, and Reception (perhaps with some additional subsections as appropriate). I'd prefer to keep the framework of this article in line with those, if that's not a dealbreaker for GA status. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:10, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, I'm reluctant to add too much detail to the lead, but I've expanded the paragraph a bit to mention the most notable accolades. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:16, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  Oops, sorry I didn't see this before blundering ahead with section moves. I'm not tied to the revisions, and if the usual format of Description, History, and Reception is a better choice, let's revert. I did think putting the description so far down seemed a bit jarring. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 23:53, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  I've made a few changes to the intro, I hope you don't mind. My vote is to keep the section order Description, History, Reception, but that's just me. @SyntheticSystems: You have the final say here! Please let us know if there's anything else you need. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:55, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  If you want to put it down there it's ok. I think everything else is good. SyntheticSystems (talk) 15:22, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  @SyntheticSystems Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:45, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	References match up what is in the article.	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	All statements are sourced.	Pass
(c) (original research)	No original research, although the author may have went to the bar.	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	No plagiarism.	Pass

Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The article covers a broad understanding of the bar and its history, although could go into more detail.	Pass
(b) (focused)	The article mentions specific details about the bar that are backed up.	Pass

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
Neutral.	Pass

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
No edit wars.	Pass

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	Images are fine with alt text.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	There could be more images of the bar, but I will pass it without many images.	Pass

Result

Result	Notes
Pass	Could be more in depth, especially in the lead, but overall pretty good.

Discussion

References

^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

@SyntheticSystems: Thanks for reviewing this article. Please let us (I've co-nominated with User:Grand'mere Eugene) know if there are any specific issues needing to be addressed. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pass SyntheticSystems (talk) 17:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 18:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SyntheticSystems I'm happy to archive this discussion, after you complete WP:GAN/I#PASS. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:10, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above 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.

[1] Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.

[2] Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.

[3] This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.

[4] Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.

[5] Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.

[6] The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]