Talk:Blackrocks Brewery/GA1
GA Review
[edit]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 |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: An anonymous username, not my real name (talk · contribs) 02:28, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
I'll review this. Looks promising at a glance. An anonymous username, not my real name 02:28, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section):
b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
It's very good already. The only issues are quite minor:
- In the lead, the Upper Peninsula of Michigan is linked while the Lower Peninsula of Michigan is not.
- "424 N. Third Street" should be spelled out in the first use.
- "Recognition and beer" could probably just be "Recognition".
- Shouldn't the "Endnotes" section be renamed "References" and the "References" section be renamed "Further reading"? I'm a little confused why it's organized this way.
- It's up to you, but consider linking — either externally or wikilinking — the sites that provided the sources cited.
- The Mining Journal is occasionally referenced as just Mining Journal.
Excellent work. I will await your reply. An anonymous username, not my real name 02:43, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
- I only noticed after posting my initial review, but the logo should have a caption, perhaps stating when it was adopted. Placing on hold now. Good luck. An anonymous username, not my real name 02:46, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
- @An anonymous username, not my real name: Apologies for the delay here! All of these should be addressed except for "recognition and beer". I used that section header because it includes both the ranked coverage of their beer and a short list of their year-round beers. On the logo, as far as I know there's no source that directly says when it was introduced, but it's been in use since the brewery opened. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Fair enough. It looks like it's in good enough shape now. Congrats! An anonymous username, not my real name 21:58, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- @An anonymous username, not my real name: Apologies for the delay here! All of these should be addressed except for "recognition and beer". I used that section header because it includes both the ranked coverage of their beer and a short list of their year-round beers. On the logo, as far as I know there's no source that directly says when it was introduced, but it's been in use since the brewery opened. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
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.