Talk:Cutting the Mustard/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tezero (talk · contribs) 17:20, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Though I think the image of Heins is a little too big, this is a stylistic choice related only tangentially to this article's fulfillment of the standard GA criteria. My main complaints—which, I have to be honest, I came close to quick-failing the article for—are two:

"Content summary" is way too brief. That much information about the book's content should probably appear in the intro; this level of summation is not acceptable for body text of a GA. In all fairness, though, my complaints have got to be actionable. What I wonder most as a reader is:

The section doesn't even mention the case being unsuccessful, like the intro does. After how much deliberation was the case closed? How much outcry was there? What was the official resolution and justification given by the court?
Also, how does she debate decisions? About how many of them? Other than them being contradictory, what positions does she offer, both on the individual decisions and on affirmative action as a whole? What kinds of demographics did these decisions cover (race, sex, class, religion, sexual orientation, etc.)?
Since she's a libertarian, I'm guessing she's not in favor of AA. If so, how does she reconcile this with her complaints about discrimination?
All of this will have to be sourced. Citations from reviews would be nice, but even specific page numbers from the book could work if you're not leaning too far into WP:OR.

Conversely, "Background" is quite a stretch too long. It's alright if there's little to nothing out there about the book's development—you can only work with what's available—but the reader does not need two full paragraphs on Heins' activities unrelated to the book, especially with non-chronological organization and a large number of events that came to fruition after the book was released. That's not background.

Please fix these issues if the article is to become a GA. Tezero (talk) 17:20, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you, Tezero, I might not have computer access for the next few days, please allow me a bit more time and I'll do my best to address above. You've made some very helpful recommendations so I wish to address them. :) — Cirt (talk) 23:00, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's fine, Cirt. I can wait as long as you're still working, within reason. Tezero (talk) 00:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, Tezero. A quick update: (1) I reduced the size of the image. (2) Working on additional research for more secondary sources for the Contents section to address your recommendations, above. (3) I've gutted the Background section, per your suggestion, to just be tighter to chronology of information prior to the book's publication. Will update with more soon, — Cirt (talk) 18:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking better so far. Keep at it. Tezero (talk) 20:14, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you, — Cirt (talk) 23:07, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Quite sorry, have had other recent sad events on my mind lately. Will do some more research and finish this up, soon. — Cirt (talk) 11:12, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. Tezero (talk) 14:27, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Working more on this now. Will add more to Content section. — Cirt (talk) 17:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added a lot more to Content section. Found two more sources. Will incorporate those as well. — Cirt (talk) 18:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking much better so far. Tezero (talk) 18:14, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! — Cirt (talk) 18:15, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Cirt: there haven't been any edits in a few days. Are you working on it in a personal tempspace or something? I don't want to fail the article, but it also isn't there yet. Tezero (talk) 17:21, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Had to get to a computer where I could access certain reference files. Doing more today, should be all done quite soon. Will update back here when done shortly. — Cirt (talk) 18:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Tezero, I've added a lot more from source, Klein 1989. I can look over a couple other sources, but I don't really want to add much more to avoid facing future criticism of {{Overly detailed}} / {{Plot}} type concerns. — Cirt (talk) 18:55, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's fine; the content's great now. Tezero (talk) 18:56, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! — Cirt (talk) 18:58, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]