Talk:Family in advertising/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: PumpkinSky (talk · contribs) 20:45, 25 November 2011 (UTC) Initial quick review:

1. Deal with the tags at the top about world scope and links. The links one should be quick and easy
2. Refs come after punctuation, not before; and there is no space between the ref and the punctuation

   Issue has been addressed Alimosser61 (talk) 19:08, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

3. One ref link is broken

   Issue addressed by group Pittsoc25 (talk) 04:40, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

4. The Italian image needs a source and how do we know it's not copyrighted? It's from IKEA.

   Issue addressed by group Pittsoc25 (talk) 02:08, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

5. The Kellog's image says some rights reserved on Flickr. How do we know it's not copyrighted?

   Issue Addressed by group Pittsoc25 (talk) 05:43, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

6. A proper lead is a summary. It will need few if any refs

   Issue addressed by group Pittsoc25 (talk) 04:13, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

7. See also should be in alphabetical order

   Issue addressed by group Pittsoc25 (talk) 02:08, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

8. Refs that are web sites should have the "accessdate=" parameter and those that are PDFs should have "format=PDF". Ensure you keep date format consistent through the article and refs

   Issue addressed by group Pittsoc25 (talk) 04:10, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

9. Some refs are missing publishers. Web refs should at a minimum have url, publisher, title, accessdate.

   Issue addressed by group Pittsoc25 (talk) 04:55, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

10. Run the three tools in the upper right toolbox on this page and fix the issues

 Done PumpkinSky talk 13:55, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

PumpkinSky talk 20:45, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

When done with the above, we'll look at content. PumpkinSky talk 15:42, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for agreeing to review this article. We will address these issues as soon as possible.

Alimosser61 (talk) 21:05, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing 'Family in Marriage'. We appreciate your input.

Pittsoc25 (talk) 02:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

See [1], anything with a URL gets |accessdate= parameter. I also uppercased PDF. I don't know if that's required but PDF looks better in uppercase. PumpkinSky talk 14:00, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Now to content:

1. "until after the revolution" begs the question what revolution. Change that using "Afterwards,..." or specify the industrial revolution.

    DoneI changed it to specify the industrial revolution. Alimosser61 (talk) 18:22, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

2. Add ref to the end of the paragraph ending in "...they will be insufficient in their role as mother."

   Deleted example that required citation because I couldn't find a source. Pittsoc25 (talk) 21:28, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

3. In "Family affects us significantly", why is family in italics?

    DoneThe italics have been removed. Alimosser61 (talk) 18:22, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

4. "abouthat there have been years in which that steady decline has been interrupted, including 1945 and 1960."...does it say why?

    DoneIt did give I reason but I'm not sure now that this sentence is all that pertinent to the article anyway so I just got rid of it. Alimosser61 (talk) 18:22, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

5. mothers and fathers don't need linking, everyone knows about them see WP:OVERLINK

    DoneI tried to get rid of all of the over-linking. Alimosser61 (talk) 18:25, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

6. This is rather Euro/North Ammerica - centric. While there are a couple sentences about Asia, can you add more, especially in history, about this topic in Asia, Africa, South America, and/or island nations? PumpkinSky talk 14:19, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

We have been trying to expand the article to a more world wide view but have not been able to find any academic sources giving information on family in advertising in places besides the US and other industrialized nations. What do you suggest?

Alimosser61 (talk) 21:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

If there are no sources for globalization of the article, then we cannot require that information. I am not seeing any relevant sources that suggest major gaps in coverage... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 23:08, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Ask Piotrus. In the meantime I'll poke around. PumpkinSky talk 23:11, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks... Alimosser61 (talk) 00:27, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

I think there's enough, barely, to justify covering a more diverse world view, but if you want to ever go for FA you'll need to find more. I had trouble finding more on this too. You do mention Asian countries a few times, etc. Nice work. I've marked it as GA and a bot should remove it from GAC.PumpkinSky talk 23:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Great! Thanks for all of your great input on this!

Alimosser61 (talk) 13:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Sure. PumpkinSky talk 15:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)