Talk:Winter: Five Windows on the Season

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Winter: Five Windows on the Season/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 20:59, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad to do this review. I'll do a close readthrough in the next day or two, noting any initial issues I see, and then start the criteria checklist. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:59, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Initial readthrough

On first pass, this looks like strong, quality work. I don't anticipate many problems in this passing GA.

• It would be helpful to add a half-sentence on what the Massey Lectures are, though of course it can be inferred.
• "Gopnik claims" -- avoid if possible per WP:WTA. Perhaps "Gopnik later stated by the end of the 20-minute bus ride"?
• I think it would be helpful to split the "Background" and "Content" sections into at least two paragraphs each, but this isn't a factor for this review, just a suggestion.
• "from being portrayed as bleak and bitter or sweet and sublime" --should this be "to sweet and sublime"? Or does he argue that winter was formerly considered bleak and sweet by different people?
• The block quotation is well chosen, very good touch there.

Since this appears close to ready, I'll begin the checklist now. -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for reading and providing comments. I have made all the suggested edits [1] maclean (talk) 06:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Excellent writing.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. 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).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass--nice work on this.