Talk:Communitas (book)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ezlev (talk · contribs) 00:55, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

At some point I hope to read this book, but I'll start by reviewing the article. Things look good at first glance – I'll update the {{GAProgress}} below as I review, and leave notes for each section under the "Notes" heading below that. I'm looking forward to collaborating with you, czar! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 00:55, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Okay czar, a few outstanding points are below if you can respond when you have a chance. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 02:59, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Ezlev and thanks for the review! Left some comments below czar 13:19, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm satisfied, Czar! This was already a good article, but now it's a Good Article. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 18:25, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Progress

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

Notes

Contents

• Totally up to you, but I think some subheadings could make this section a bit easier to read. Maybe one for the first half and one for the second, with the first paragraph left as-is under the main heading?
  • Usually I avoid single paragraph sections, as they can often be left without a header with no detriment to the reader. I'd consider leaving the first two paragraphs and adding a "Goodman paradigms" heading to split the section but generally I'm not sure it'll add much unless I expand further. I considered numbering the three paragraphs that each outline a Goodman paradigm (like a list) but that felt like overkill. czar 13:19, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Publication

• Why is "in the Le Corbusier sketch style" commented out?
  • Wasn't sure if it was a prominent opinion or just trivia. If no other review mentions it, I'd likely exclude it. czar 13:19, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
• "the authors, as New Yorkers, are dismissive of cultures unlike the megacity's" – this seems like a big detail. Is it mentioned anywhere else? Could it be elaborated on a bit?
  • Which part: general New Yorker chauvinism or how it played a role in the book? There are other refs that discuss Paul Goodman's self-identification with New York City but none of the other reviews/sources I've read have discussed this detail as a major role in the book besides what Widmer mentioned. czar 13:19, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
    • I meant its role in the book, but if that's not discussed elsewhere, the current mention seems totally fine. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 18:23, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

References

• Last section first - it looks like Ellerby 1962 and Stoehr 2001 are in the references but not cited in the article. Can those be removed, or moved to a further reading section?
  • Moved to Further reading until I expand from them czar 13:19, 1 April 2022 (UTC)