Talk:Borjomi (water)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 17:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found

Linkrot: none found Jezhotwells (talk) 18:06, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The lead does not fully summarise the article, please read WP:LEAD

   I made a number of copy-edits.[1]

   I don't personally see problem with the lead. Do you have any suggestions? Tuscumbia (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

   It fails to summarise the history, which could be a paragraph in the lead. WP:Guide to writing better articles#Lead section

   The Packaging section needs to be converted to prose

   Done. Tuscumbia (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

   Per WP:OVERLINKING you don't need a wikilink for all of the export countries

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Parts of the article are woefully under referenced. I have placed citation needed tags where appropriate. Done

   All of the parts you tagged for citation actually come from the same source - the history page of the company. I already added the source to parts you had tagged. Tuscumbia (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

   I changed the URLs of two Russian language references to the English language pages.

   Thanks! I had already provided the translation of the sources but I see no problem with having the titles in English only. Tuscumbia (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

   Sources used appear reliable.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Reasonably broad and focussed.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

   I notice that there is a query over the copyright status of File:Woman handing man a glass of water at Evgeniewski (?) fountain, Borjomi, Georgia.jpg, but it should be OK, if someone can check its status under the 2008 copyright law of Russia.

   "Avoid sandwiching text between two images that face each other." WP:MOSIM

   The use of an image gallery is , I feel, not appropriate, many of these images are already in the Wiki Commons gallery which is linked. "The images in the gallery collectively must have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject. Images in a gallery should be suitably captioned to explain their relevance both to the article subject and to the theme of the gallery, and the gallery should be appropriately titled (unless the theme of the gallery is clear from the context of the article). Images in a gallery should be carefully selected, avoiding similar or repetitive images, unless a point of contrast or comparison is being made. Just as we seek to ensure that the prose of an article is clear, precise and engaging, galleries should be similarly well-crafted." WP:Galleries

   I agree, we can delete the gallery if it's unnecessary. As far as the File:Woman handing man a glass of water at Evgeniewski (?) fountain, Borjomi, Georgia.jpg image is concerned, we could place another image there instead. It just relates to the History section since this spring was built by one of the sponsors who named the spring after himself. Tuscumbia (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

• I found a color PD photo of the same spring by Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky. I think it is of better quality. --Kober^Talk 09:50, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

1. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for seven days for the issues above to be addressed.

   Ok, just the lead to sort out. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:29, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

   All in order now, you have a good article. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 18:06, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

   Thanks! :) Tuscumbia (talk) 18:41, 2 May 2011 (UTC)