Talk:Flag of Provo, Utah/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: The C of E (talk · contribs) 13:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

I will review this. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 13:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

• WP:LEADCITE states the opening paragraph needs citations, of which there are none presently.
  • The policy you linked says "The verifiability policy advises that material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and direct quotations, should be supported by an inline citation." There is no controversial information in the lead, as with many articles, and thus I don't feel it needs to be cluttered with citations.
• MOS:INTRO says the into must "provide an accessible overview". I do not believe that two sentences adequately fulfill that to GA standards so could do with a bit of filling out.
  • Added a bit more to the lead, but anything longer would be overkill.
• The Design section is a bit bare with two, one sentece paragraphs. That would need expanding.
  • The flag itself is quite bare, so a short and concise description is appropriate. Should I add a description of the seal?
• Is there an image for the red P first flag?
  • I could not find any images of the first flag.
• Is there a bit of background on the vexillological survey? (ie. which flag was the worst)
  • Added a bit of information.
• Could we get a bit more information about the Provo resident's reactions to the adoption of the new flag?
  • There doesn't seem to be any coverage or interviews with residents regarding the adopted flag.
• With the sourcing, are italics being used for all source names or just print ones?
  • The italics are from the work parameter in {{cite news}}, which I use for the names of proper publications. TV news websites are left un-italicized, as they are publishers.
• Source 15, is a WP:TWITTER source really necessary? There isn't anything else that could be used as a source?
  • I've replaced it with a news article mentioning the 51 submissions.

@SounderBruce: In all, a lot of work is needed in my view to make this a comprehensive article that meets GA standards. IF you're able to fix the issues raised then I'll be happy to pass it. Until then, this is On hold. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 13:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

@The C of E: I think I have fixed or answered the issues you've raised. This article is a bit difficult to deal with, given how little there is in the way of verifiable references. SounderBruce 19:27, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

@SounderBruce: I do think that design section still needs a bit of work. If you could included a description of the seal, that would help or at least put both sentences into one paragraph. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:38, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

@The C of E: Y Merged the paragraphs and added a description of the seal. SounderBruce 17:46, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, I am happy to pass this now. Well done. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:31, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.