Talk:Baconnaise/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Newyorkadam (talk · contribs) 07:01, 17 January 2014 (UTC) I will review this :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 07:01, 17 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

Quick-glance comments:

I mentioned some quick-glance comments to you on IRC.

Comments:

This sentence needs a rewrite. "Baconnaise, does not taste like mayonnaise and its strong flavors overpowers dips, salad dressings or fish dishes."

Done

Wikilink 'Bacon Salt]] using this wikilink text: '[[Bacon_salt#Bacon_Salt|Bacon Salt]]'

Done

I think this should say 'while making a joke' (not having) "In an interview with ABC News, Esch and Lefkow stated that they came up with the original idea for bacon products and their first invention, Bacon Salt, while having a joke about the subject over a meal at a diner."

Done

Wikilink Jon Steward

Done

"Lesie Kelly" should be "Leslie Kelly"

Done

What do you mean 'according to Bacon Salt'? Is Bacon Salt a person? Please mention who said it while representing Bacon Salt. "In 2010, John Stewart again lampooned Baconnaise with a fake clip of the billboard in Times Square that drew a response from Bacon Salt. According to Bacon Salt, there was plan to run an actual billboard ad, but it was declined by Comedy Central."

Resolved, it was the official response of the company. I fixed it to J&D foods official name and linked it. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think a comma should be added here after 'costumes' and before 'and also': "Together, they created interest in their products by going to numerous sporting events dressed in bacon costumes and also used social networking sites to raise awareness of their company."
Wikilink Comedy Central

Done

Wikilink 'Winfrey'

Done

Since you never mentioned any ingredients, it shouldn't say 'Other ingredients', it should say something like 'Some ingredients': Other ingredients listed on the jars include natural smoke flavor and tocopherols.q

Resolved. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilink smoke flavor

Done

Please change "Will Goldfarb of Serious Eats reviewed Baconnaise" to "Will Goldfarb of the website [[Serious Eats]] reviewed Baconnaise"

Done

You mention Baconnaise Lite once, but never describe what it is. Can you do that somewhere please?
If you want to put quotation marks around 'Serious Eats', please do it in the above paragraph too. Also, please add a comma after 'Baconnaise' in this section. Also, please wikilink animal fat "Original recipes featuring different animal fat-infused mayonnaises, including Baconnaise were covered on the 'Serious Eats' website."

Done

This should say "water, and lemon juice." (you forgot the and). Also, please wikilink the foods in this article sentence: "The recipe includes crumbled bacon strips, liquid rendered bacon fat, canola oil, egg yolks, Dijon mustard with water, lemon juice."

Done

Please add some things under the 'See more' section. I know you have the Bacon portal, but maybe you could wikilink Bacon and/or other things :)

If it is linked within the article it should not be in the "See also". See also is supposed to be for related, but undiscussed aspects of am article. I also added links for Bacon Salt. So I think this is okay. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's it for now! Placing on hold, you have seven days to make these changes :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 18:53, 17 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

Fixed all those issues. How's it look now? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I dug up more information on the release and got the list of ingredients and expanded a bit more on the Baconnaise Lite matter, but the product is no longer sold so I stated that. Should be even better now. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:49, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Right now I'm working with Chris on IRC. -Newyorkadam (talk) 02:24, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

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.	After fixes, yes! :)
	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:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Contains 17 references.
	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).	Contains many in-line citations!
	2c. it contains no original research.
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.	I don't see any bias.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Only recent edits (except for one) are from ChrisGualtieri, the Good Article nominator.
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.	One image in the infobox of a bottle of Baconnaise. Image is from Flickr and released under the Attribution 2.0 Generic license which is allowed on Wikipedia, However, the image is blurry, low-resolution, and small. Try to find another image please :)
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Image is definitely relevant to the topic, it's a photo of a bottle of Baconnaise. Image doesn't have a caption; it doesn't need one, but it certainly can't hurt.
	7. Overall assessment.	Nice job Chris :)

Final decision comment: Passed! Nice work Chris :) Thanks for putting up with my strict reviewing :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 02:59, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]