Talk:Mind Magic (magazine)

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mind Magic (magazine)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose (talk · contribs) 18:27, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

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: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

• Copyvio check: both matches over 1% found using Earwig's Copyvio Detector were literally just the phrase "Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Weird Fiction Magazines".

• Image - public domain, appropriate use and caption. alt text could be added.

• Spot checks on Ashley (2000), Galactic Central, The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction - no issues.

• "The title was changed to My Self;" - add in the article body that this was after four issues.

  Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

• Seems to me that it's worth mentioning the publisher and editor in the lead; but as it's a short article, that's optional.

  Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

• "the editor was G.R. Bay throughout" - can be "the editor was Bay throughout" as they have already been mentioned.

  Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

• The "Fix sources" script suggests using the {{reflist}} template instead of <references />; seems like this might be only a cosmetic change, but it can be amended if there is any reason to do so.

  I use {{reflist}} when I need to use the parameters, but <references /> is almost identical to {{reflist}} with no parameters, and has the additional advantage that in the visual editor it updates as you edit. Since I use the visual editor I'd like to keep it the way it is -- I don't think there's any harm to the article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

• Article is 396 words. Based on the minimum level of information I'd expect in such an article, what I've seen in sources, and an internet search, I'm satisfied that the article "addresses the main aspects of the topic" as required by the third GA criterion.

  Yes, this is about the shortest article I've ever nominated, and I was a bit concerned about the length, but it includes everything I can find out about the topic. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on the article, Mike Christie. I have just a couple of comments above; happy to discuss, or be challenged on them. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:00, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the review; replies above. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Mike Christie. I'm satisfied that the article meets the GA criteria, so am passsing it. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:05, 5 September 2022 (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.