Talk:Fuller's Coffee Shop/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: Danielyng (talk · contribs) 20:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I am notifying you of my intentions to start reviewing this Article for Good Article status. Expect a full review to be out in a week at most, probably either tomorrow or Friday. Danielyng (talk) 20:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much! This restaurant article will hopefully be my 12th or so promoted to GA status in the last couple months. Looking forward to addressing any concerns you may have. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:11, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Seeing as Danielyng seems to be busy, I will try to assist in reviewing this article.

Here are my preliminary observations (note: 'Pending' fields do not mean non-compliance, just that I haven't reviewed said field yet). @Danielyng: If you intend to review, you can fill in the template below. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI ^{converse | fings wot i hav dun} 12:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

   No prose problems within the article. Lead is informative enough and grammar is all fine. It feels a little like there are a lot of reviews, but I don't feel that's a bad thing.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   I am yet to look into copyvios and plagiarism, though I know I'm unlikely to find any. Sources look fine but I want to look in deeper. No OR at all. No copyvio, no non-RS - checked with Earwig copyvio tool.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   This article covers all that needs to be covered in an article of its kind - location, description, menu and reviews.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   I cannot find any neutrality problems within this article.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No edit wars. Indeed, I think it's very unlikely to be an edit-war-prone article in any way whatsoever.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images are all good to go - all but the logo are free use and the fair use rationale for the logo is satisfactory.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: , but Danielyng must close.

So far as I see it, the article is almost good to go ahead as a GA. If anyone reading this has anything to tell me, or if you're closing the review, please ping me. Kind regards, Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI ^{converse | fings wot i hav dun} 12:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI, Thank you! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:11, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Review done, at least to my satisfaction. However, Danielyng, being the formal reviewer, must be the one to close. Kind regards, Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI ^{converse | fings wot i hav dun} 13:54, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI, Do I need to submit a request to close this review? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:38, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

@Jurysith: Hello! Just checking in here. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:07, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I am not intending to review this article, but I did take a look at it since it was pointed to from the main GAN talk page. From my perspective, the step-in-assist review that was done here was fair enough in terms of looking at what's in the article now, but didn't really examine what could be in the article but is not. For instance, who are the owners of the diner, and have there been previous owners during its existence? What is its capacity? Has it been profitable? What are its lease terms like, or is the property owned? Has it ever been remodeled or refurbished? Does it have a unionized staff or not? Has the diner ever taken any political stances or other kinds of community involvements? Does it have any explicitly vegetarian offerings? These are all things that I've seen addressed in some other diner articles I've looked at. And amidst this sea of positive reviews, there must be somebody somewhere who didn't like it. Those are just my thoughts, I realize that there may not be sources available for some of these ... Wasted Time R (talk) 18:18, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Wasted Time R, Thanks. I'd say I've thoroughly reviewed sourcing for the subject and did not come across claims related to the topics you've raised. -18:23, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for updating the article. For the record, I assumed the official websites for the diner and the Urban Restaurant Group were not considered appropriate sources, but I don't mind keeping them if you and other editors consider them fine to use. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:19, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Those sites seem okay to me for plain statements of ownership history (and nothing I saw on web/newspaper searches suggested that history was wrong). But obviously one wouldn't want to use the Fuller's website for things like the "A legend in its own time" quote. Wasted Time R (talk) 21:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good, thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:00, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

I have just posted a note on Jurysith's talk page, giving them until the end of 2020 to either continue the review or post here that they won't be doing so. At that point, another reviewer (Gerald Waldo Luis?) should feel free to take over and continue/conclude the review. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:02, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

BlueMoonset, Thanks for the update, and of course User:Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI has already reviewed as well. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:03, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

My apologies, User:Another Believer and Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI: I had copied a similar message from the other Jurysith review and meant to change the reviewer's name, but neglected to do so. Note to Gerald Waldo Luis: this one's taken; Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI has already done the initial review (and it may be complete already!). We now just need to wait until 2021 begins or Jurysith returns. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:00, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

BlueMoonset, Happy New Year, ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:24, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Another Believer, congratulations! The article is now a GA. I made one tiny edit, wikilinking "pancake" and removing "also". The article is really well written. Thanks also to Wasted Time R for their additions. All the best for 2021. Cheers, Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI ^{converse | fings wot i hav dun} 07:03, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI, Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:37, 5 January 2021 (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.