Talk:Ancient furniture/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Liam2520 (talk · contribs) 01:57, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I will be reviewing this article. Expect comments within a week.

Comments

Prose

The prose still contains many sentences that are short and choppy, which affect the readability "flow" of the article. For example, here you mention three cultures in four separate sentences.

In Egypt thrones were only used by the rich. Dilmunite stools would be richly decorated if the user was wealthy. Upper class citizens in China would decorate their beds. In Israel the only beds with pillows were owned by wealthy people.

Clear composite and complex sentences, as well as properly placed commas, improve readability. For example, these two sentences,

In Egypt, thrones and richly decorated dilmunite stools were only used by the wealthy. Upper class citizens in China would decorate their beds, while in Israel, only wealthy people owned beds with pillows.

would likely "flow" easier.

Coverage

I have seen you have extended the article quite a bit since the last GAN, but the Indian section is sill quite short. I see that there are a number of references for that small section, so if you can have a bit more info drawn out from each of them, that would be great.

Wording

Section 4.1

The most common form of Greek seat was the backless stool, which must have been found in every Greek home.

Section 5.1

Both slaves and emperors used it, although those of the poor were surely plain.

Try to remove these weasel words (and others throughout the article), and reword it in a more encyclopaedic tone. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch.

Sections

Lead

• This is the section that needs to be the most accessible and easy to read, which means cleaning up the prose. If someone only reads the lead, they need to know only the most important parts about Ancient Furniture, in a clear and easy way.
• Some civilizations used inlay. Be more specific.
• Some ancient furniture had religious or symbolic purposes. Late nineteenth-century art movement – not the right link, I think.
• Other civilizations had such differences. That sentence doesn't really make much sense in this scenario. Consider rewording it.

Greece

• I think this section could do with some more links. Link to some of the different types of wood, veneered, as well as carving, steam treatment, and the lathe, if they have their own articles.

Rome

Minor issue:

were preserved by the eruption of Vesuvius in AD 79 — change link to the eruption of Mount Vesuvius.

Japan

Despite the fact that bamboo was common in the furniture of other ancient Asian cultures, bamboo was not common in Japanese furniture.

Can you provide some specific examples of the other cultures?

Israel

How does the image provided directly relate to what is in the article? If it doesn't, remove and try to find a replacement.

Mesoamerica

Is it possible to provide some more pictures for this section? I think that it would enhance the article since furniture is quite a visual thing.

Also, can you link the start of the Incan section with the relevant article, if there is one?

Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Fail
· · ·

Result/Outcome

I have failed this article because I believe it does not meet GA criteria number 1, as well as partially not meeting criterion 3, 4 and 6. I do not believe that the article can get to GA standard within the one week holding period.

Suggestions

• Read Wikipedia's Manual of Style.
• Consult other users before putting this article up for GA again.
• Reread this, and the previous GA review.
• Follow the Good article criteria precisely.

I would like to see this article at GA level, and wish you all the best at getting it there.

Kind regards,

Liam2520 (talk) 03:12, 10 December 2021 (UTC)