Talk:Criticism of copyright/GA2
(Redirected from Talk:Anti-copyright/GA2)
Latest comment: 15 years ago by SasiSasi in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- See WP:OVERLINK. "The authors stops short of stating that copyright law has been made redundant by the rise of "the darknet""--the word you're looking for might be obsolete, but it's certainly not redundant. Magazine/Newspaper titles need to be italicized.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- "Anti-copyright arguments question the logic of [...] spirituality." Unreferenced in lead and body. Also, first paragraph of Web 2.0 really reads like OR.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Anti Patent does not belong in this article, without more context and explanation--Can it be broken out and referenced separately?
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- Just fine.
- 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):
- Wouldn't hurt to have more, but this is acceptable.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Look at all the typos, grammar, and whatnot that I fixed while doing this review. Overall, the prose needs a good once-over and copyediting. References have apparently improved since last GA review, but as it stands now, they're good sources, but cited sparingly--sometimes it seems one reference is meant to cover multiple sentences. Fix the overlinks and add italics per WP:MOS#Italics. Strongly consider removing Anti-Patent to its own article--it's a different beast, and feels a bit like a WP:COATRACK in here. This is an important topic to cover well, and I encourage you to keep up the good work. Unfortunately, this is not yet GA class. Since you've been working on it actively, I'm placing it ON HOLD for one week for the editors to make corrections and improvements. Jclemens (talk) 21:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
Follow Up edit
- So, I can possibly do some copyediting on this. If you don't mind, I can go through and tag things that I see as needing expert interpretation, and I can try and fix simple problems myself.
- You still need to fix the linking per WP:OVERLINK--Copyright appears *five* times in the lead. Only the first should be wikilinked.