User:Quadell/Key

Quiz answers

Imagine that you are reviewing a Good Article nominee, and you come across the following situations. For each one, try to determine if it is

(A), a problem that must be fixed for the article to attain GA status,

(B), a short-coming that should eventually be fixed, though it isn't necessary for GA status, or

(C), not a problem at all.

In addition, if the answer is (A), please try to determine which Good article criterion is being violated.

1. A sentence in the lead has a spelling error, although it's clear what is meant.

   (A) Criterion 1a requires that the spelling be correct throughout the article.

2. The article contains a direct quote without an inline citation to give the source of that quote.

   (A) Criterion 2b requires "in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations".

3. The article is missing an infobox.

   (C) Articles may use infoboxes or may omit them. It's fine either way.

4. The article uses British English in some parts, and American English in other parts.

   (B) The Manual of Style says: "While Wikipedia does not favor any national variety of English, within a given article the conventions of one particular variety should be followed consistently." However, this is not a GA requirement.

5. The article's lead section discusses only the positive aspects of a controversial subject, while the article's body discusses both the positive and negative aspects.

   (A) Criterion 1b requires that the article follow Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, which says a lead should "define the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points—including any prominent controversies."

6. The article contains several red links, and also contains links to redirect pages.

   (C) Even Featured Articles may have red links and links to redirect pages.

7. There are grammar errors, such as sentence fragments, in several places, though it's clear what is meant.

   (A) Criterion 1a requires correct grammar.

8. The article contains non-standard date formats, such as "June thirteenth, '95".

   (B) The Manual of Style says that dates should follow one of the acceptable formats, but this is not a GA requirement.

9. The article does not contain any images, although there are relevant public-domain images available on Commons.

   (A) Criterion 6 requires that articles be "illustrated, if possible, by images". But please note: if there are no free images readily available, or if the available images are only marginally relevant, then they should not be required.

10. The sources are formatted inconsistently, with some books including ISBNs and some not, and some including page numbers and some not.

    (B) It's certainly better to have the sources formatted consistently, and ISBNs and page numbers are very useful, but this is not a GA requirement.

11. The article's lead section is made of a single sentence.

    (A) Criterion 1b requires that the article follow Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section.

12. An article on a work of fiction contains a plot summary written in the past tense.

    (A) Criterion 1b requires that the article follow Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction, which says that plot summaries "should be written in the present tense, as this is the way that the story is experienced as it is read or viewed".

13. An article uses only three sources, although those sources are reliable and seem to cover all the material in the article.

    (B) or (C). Sometimes there are only three reliable sources for a subject. Sometimes the article would be improved by the addition of more sources, but that's not a GA requirement.

14. A mildly-controversial statement in the article has an inline citation to someone's personal blog, which backs up the statement.

    (A) Criterion 2b requires "in-line citations from reliable sources" for "statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged". A personal blog is not a reliable source.

15. The article contains an "External links" section below a "See also" section.

    (C), criterion 1b requires that the article follow Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout, which says that an "External links" section should be below a "See also" section, assuming both sections exist in the article. (On the other hand, if the "See also" section had come first, we would be required to switch the order.)

16. The article refers to the subject as "brilliant", "extraordinary", and "prestigious".

    (A), criterion 1b requires that the article follow Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch, which says that sentences that use such "peacock terms" must be rewritten.

17. The article's title is non-standard, such as "Captain Bluebeard, pirate".

    (B), Wikipedia:Article titles gives guidance on article names, but it is not a GA requirement.

18. The article contains curse words in a direct quote that is relevant to the topic.

    (C), Wikipedia is not censored.

19. The article has closely used a source, almost copying the text, but changing a few words here and there.

    (A) Criterion 1a requires that the article respect copyright laws. Simply changing a few words is known as close paraphrasing, and is still a copyright violation.

20. All of the sources for an article are in a language you can't read.

    (C) This is not a problem, although you may choose to ask for assistance from Wikipedia:Translation, or from another reviewer who can read the language.