![]() | Rosetta (restaurant) is currently an Agriculture, food and drink good article nominee. Nominated by (CC) Tbhotch™ at 02:52, 9 June 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: Restaurant in Mexico City |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was created or improved during WikiProject Latin America's "Latin American and the Caribbean 10,000 Challenge", which started on November 1, 2016, and is ongoing. You can help out! |
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Rosetta (restaurant)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Tbhotch (talk · contribs) 02:52, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: That Tired Tarantula (talk · contribs) 06:44, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I'll be reviewing this article during the next few days. That Tired TarantulaBurrow 06:44, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
First look
editCriteria
edit- No maintenance templates:
- Relavent images are present:
- No recent edit wars:
Copyright
edit- No copyright violations/plagiarism:
- Images are free (unless a rationale is given if they are not) and tagged:
Prose
editBroadness and focus
editThe article stays focused and has all the sections that an article about a restaurant should have and there is no significant information omitted. Looks good.
Writing and MoS
editThe article is very well-written and follows MoS guidelines.
Neutrality
editAt first, I was a bit conerned about due weight, since there are only positive reviews presented in the article, but after looking onine, there doesn't seem to be any mixed or negative reviews from reliable sources. There's a couple words to watch, but they help out with explaining things and making the writing in the article flow; assumptions aren't made.
References
editEvaluating sources
editAll of the sources are reliable, secondary, and independent.
Citation accuracy
edit1. The restaurant having reservations is kind of an indirect assumption, but it's a reasonable one; I'm not concerned about it.
2 and 3. Where do the sources mention the restaurant being a la carte?
- I changed them with a more explicit source
4. Looks good
5. Looks good
6 and 7. Same as with the first reference, the cities or states that the towns and areas are located is inferred, but it's logical, so it's fine.
7. The source mentions how the dough has been fermenting for nine years, but doesn't mention when the restaurant was first made.
- Reworded. (CC) Tbhotch™ 04:50, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
8. Looks good
I'll update this list as I go through the citations in the article.