Talk:Westman's Bagel & Coffee/GA1
GA Review
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Another Believer (talk · contribs) 19:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: TrademarkedTWOrantula (talk · contribs) 14:20, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Bagels and coffee?? TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 14:20, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Only gonna do initial comments for this review. I will be back in a couple of hours. TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 14:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Apologies if the review seems to be delayed. I have schoolwork I need to catch up on (as is for everyone). TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 03:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- No worries at all! There's no rush here. ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Apologies if the review seems to be delayed. I have schoolwork I need to catch up on (as is for everyone). TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 03:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:45, 29 April 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, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
|
|
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. | A considerable amount of text is copied from one article. |
| 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. | |
|
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | Article has only one contributor, so no edit wars have occurred. Development is at a steady pace. |
| 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. | Logo is tagged with copyright status and non-free use rationale. All other images are tagged with the CC 4.0 SA license. |
|
|
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Logo and building images are relevant. Captions are suitable. |
|
7. Overall assessment. | |
Copyright violations
- Quite concerning. Top result is at a 49% similarity; one paragraph is even copied word-for-word.
- The paragraph is attributed appropriately in the Reception section. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Images
- I'm not sure why there are three different images of the same location. Couldn't the third image (in the reception section) suffice?
- I have replaced one with a photo of the University District location. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)