Talk:Vénus de Quinipily

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Vénus de Quinipily/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tim riley (talk · contribs) 12:47, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Beginning first read-through. More soonest. Tim riley talk 12:47, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

First few comments.

• The article seems to be intended to be in AmEng: we have "color", "worshiped", "practiced", "honor" and "chiseled", but we also have the BrEng "metres" and "centre". Either (or any) variety of English is fine, but you should be consistent throughout the article.

• Changed to US English.

• Origin
  • "Per French archaeologist" – "per" is horrible. The old advice, "prefer good English to bad Latin" is still wise. "According to the French archaelogist" would be fine.

• Changed.

• Names
  • The words "the statue" occur six times in this short para. Please consider replacing them with "it" from time to time, perhaps at the third and fifth occurrence.

• Made a few changes. Please let me know if its still not suitable.

• Demolition and restoration
  • "placed again at its original place" – repetition of place – perhaps "restored to its original place"?

• Changed.

More as soon as I can. I'm greatly enjoying the article. Tim riley talk 13:42, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. I have addressed your comments so far. - Vivvt (Talk) 16:10, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Concluding comments

• "The facial expression of the statue is said to have distinct similarities with those of Egyptian idols with its fingers and toes represented by lines" - the first and second parts of this sentence don't seem to relate to each other. Do you mean that the lines for fingers and toes are also characteristic of Egyptian idols? If so, I suggest something like: "The statue is said [by whom?] to have similarities with Egyptian idols in its facial expression and in the use of lines to represent its fingers and toes."

• Changed the sentence to clear the confusion about fingers-toes and facial expression.

• "It is surrounded by a granite tank filled with water which has been brought through pipes from nearby, mostly that of the Saint-Michel fountain in north". – I can't quite chisel the meaning out of this. Am I right in thinking it means "It is surrounded by a granite tank filled with water brought through pipes from nearby sources, principally the Saint-Michel fountain in the north"?

• Changed. I had tough time putting that correctly earlier. Thanks for the suggestion.

• "The heritage protection was made applicable from November 18, 1943" – should that read "1993"?

• No. Its 1943 and not 1993. Not sure why its backdated protection.

• Bibliography: you need to clean up the capitalisation of titles. For example, "A handbook for travellers in France" needs a capital H and T" (see the text of the book), and "The Early Races Of Scotland And Their Monuments" should not have capitals for "of" and "and".

• Fixed.

If you can clear up these points I see no obstacle to promotion to GA. This is a most interesting and well-researched article.

I have changed the article as per your comments. Please let me know if there is anything else to be improved. - Vivvt (Talk) 15:02, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   Well referenced.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Well referenced.

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   Well illustrated.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   Well illustrated.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

A fine piece of work, and one I greatly enjoyed reading. Certainly meets all the GA criteria in my view. Tim riley talk 20:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Dimensions of the cistern

"The tank is 210 meters long, 178 meters wide, and 108 meters high.[27]"

Is that right? The tank is over nine acres in extent and three hundred and fifty feet deep? I've tried checking the reference, but I get an error message in French. Agemegos (talk) 02:17, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Engraved letters

You tell us that the letters may once have read ""ILITHYIA", but don't say what this means. Yes, it is linked, but something that is as significant to the story of this article (not just a passing mention) needs to be explained. The meaning of the word is important here. Amandajm (talk) 01:14, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I agree with you, Amandajm, so I added that she is the Greek goddess of childbirth. --71.178.50.222 (talk) 19:10, 6 June 2014 (UTC)