Talk:Ali's Smile/GA1

GA Review

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

Hi Awadewit. I'm proposing to review this article. Fainites ^barleyscribs 20:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Fainites! Nice to see you again! Thanks for reviewing the article. Awadewit (talk) 21:05, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written

I find this sentence First published in 1971, the book eventually contained a group of previously published newspaper articles as well as the short story "Ali's Smile", all of which address Scientology. a bit confusing. Would it better if it said First published in 1971 as the short story "Ali's Smile", the the book eventually contained a group of previously published newspaper articles all of which address Scientology.
This eventually comes a bit soon after the previous one. Burroughs had been interested in Scientology throughout the 1960s, believing that its methods might help combat a controlling society, eventually joining the Church of Scientology later in the decade. How about and he joined or some other wording.
expose should have an acute accent.
Should this be two sentences? He became increasingly disenchanted with the group and wrote a series of critical articles published in Mayfair;[18] he also forced one of their headquarters to move by publicizing photos of it.[19]

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Fainites (talk • contribs)

Comment: Addressed these above four points: [1], [2], [3], [4]. Thanks for doing the GA Review, Cirt (talk) 20:44, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2. Factually accurate and verifiable

3. Broad in its coverage

Is there any particular reason why "Ali's Smile" is at the bottom of the description of contents? If not, it would be better at the top. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fainites (talk • contribs)

Comment: Yes good question, this is the order in which it appears in the book itself. (Essentially the bolded headings within that subsection follow the order of the book's table of contents.) Cirt (talk) 20:50, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered if that were the case. Best leave it then. Fainites ^barleyscribs 22:14, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

4. Neutral

5. Stable

6. Images

More tommorrow. Fainites ^barleyscribs 22:28, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comngratulations!!! Despite my best efforts I can't find anything else to complain about. A most interesting article. Fainites ^barleyscribs 20:45, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 20:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]