Talk:Central Park Conservancy/GA1
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: BlackfullaLinguist (talk · contribs) 12:39, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello! I have started a review of this article, and here are the points I have:
- 1. First off, great job on the lead! It adequately defines the topic however it has no citations.
- 2. It is very well-written and sufficiently linked.
- 3. I do find it broad, however a quick google of it, and I found these two articles: [[1]] & [[2]] and can not find mentions of the conservancy's new upgrades, nor information about it's role in hosting festivals and events in the park.
- 4. The rest of the article seems well-cited and verifiable.
- 5. There is sufficient illustrates for GA status I believe.
I believe with some minor additions (point 3) and some cites in the lead (point 1) that the article can then be passed. I will give you the recommended 7 days to make the suggested edits or discuss them with me, if you can not do it within 7 days please let me know! BlackfullaLinguist (talk) 12:39, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
- @BlackfullaLinguist: Thanks for the review. To your point #1, per WP:CITELEAD, the lead doesn't necessarily need citations, but I'll add them anyway. As for the upgrades, I believe I added them already, but I will add stuff about the events soon. epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
- @BlackfullaLinguist: OK, I added some events and added citations to the lead. The information about new upgrades is at the end of the history section. epicgenius (talk) 14:09, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
- @BlackfullaLinguist: Thanks for the review. To your point #1, per WP:CITELEAD, the lead doesn't necessarily need citations, but I'll add them anyway. As for the upgrades, I believe I added them already, but I will add stuff about the events soon. epicgenius (talk) 13:52, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
I have reviewed the latest changes, and in light of them consider this article to have passed the Good Article review. Congratulations to @Epicgenius: on your work. I consider this article well-written and informative, with broad coverage of the Conservancy it's history, roles, management, and associated events public activities, in addition to appropriate citations for verifiability. The imaging is sufficient, and the article is neutral in its prose. This reviewed has been finalised, once again congratulations and thank you for your contributions. BlackfullaLinguist (talk) 01:51, 2 August 2019 (UTC)