Talk:Hercules (nightclub)/GA1

GA Review

Latest comment: 3 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion

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: Uness232 (talk · contribs) 06:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Quick preliminary: It needs work, but no need for a quick fail. Will fill this table as I assess.

Hi, Uness232, and thank you for taking on this review! Armadillo pteryx 13:01, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.^[1]

Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);^[2]

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;^[3] and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

^[4]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

^[5]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.^[6]

Review

Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	The prose is clear (yes) concise (yes) and understandable to an appropriately broad audience (yes); spelling and grammar are correct (yes). Just to be clear, what do you feel is repeated or disorderly in the example text quoted here? The information is presented in chronological order, and no information is repeated. The owners' names are mentioned once, and the manager's name is mentioned once. Armadillo pteryx 13:01, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply Re-reading this comment, I'm still not sure I see an issue with mentioning the owners since they are the ones who remodeled the space, but I've now moved the manager's name to the Description section. Not sure if that's what you meant, but hope it helps! Armadillo pteryx 14:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply Mentioning the owners is completely fine, my problem was that the way in which those sentences were ordered, I think that made it hard to follow through, and I guess my major problem was that information about the owners didn't belong there in the article, which you did fix. I am genuinely sorry, I should have done better explaining that. On repetition, it isn't about that quote, rather it is general information presented in a similar amount of detail in different sections. In particular, the financial difficulties are presented with similar detail in the lead and history section. I think for the lead just mentioning the financial difficulties is enough. There are other things that you could delete, but I'm happy giving this one a pass after that. Uness232 (talk) 16:28, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply Ohh, got it! I understand now. I will go trim the details on financial difficulties in the lead. Armadillo pteryx 16:31, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply	Pass
(b) (MoS)	It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections (yes), layout (seems okay, yes), words to watch (yes), fiction (it's not fiction), and list incorporation (no lists in the article).	Pass

Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	it contains a list of all references (yes), presented in accordance with the layout style guidelines (yes)	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	all inline citations are from reliable sources (I think this is really good considering the standards for this type of article), including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines (don't think there's too much need for this here);	Pass
(c) (original research)	Question, is Koski's statements on Escale's closing present in the sources? Yes, the direct quote from his interview here is Olimme saaneet niihin aikoihin häädön Escalesta. Harkitsimme siitä oikeusjuttuakin, koska selkeästi haluttiin vain homot pois kiinteistöstä, which translates to We got evicted from Escale at that time. We considered filing a lawsuit, because they clearly just wanted the gays out of the building. (translation my own). Armadillo pteryx 17:14, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply Alright, thanks! Uness232 (talk) 17:15, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	All of the tools I have access to say that it's highly unlikely, and I can't see any either	Pass

Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	Covers everything pretty well as far as I understand	Pass
(b) (focused)	Quite focused.	Pass

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
If there is a distinctly negative review, maybe you could include it, but I don't see that as a reason to fail this.	Pass

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
No reverted major changes or edit warring.	Pass

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	Yes, the one photo that is non-free has a rationale.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	Personally not the biggest fan of the dance floor photo (photography-wise), but that's just my opinion, everything is appropriate. I agree—wish I had a better photo, but sadly I don't. Couldn't find anything licensed for reuse on Google, either. Armadillo pteryx 17:24, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply	Pass

Result

Result	Notes
Pass	The article is sufficient, concise and covers the topic well.

Discussion

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.

^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

Add topic

[1] Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.

[2] Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.

[3] This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.

[4] Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.

[5] Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.

[6] The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]