Talk:Stones Bitter/GA2

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: North8000 (talk · contribs) 13:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Pretty well written article overall. Some initial comments are as follows:

• Article seems to lean a bit towards promotional. Peacock words used in a few places in the beginning. Also, in the advertising section, the amount of weight / space given to repeating the talking points of the various campaigns and commercials seems a bit promotional.

Looks improved North8000 (talk)

• Don't see a use rationale of the non-free image for this article.

Looks resolved. North8000 (talk) 17:23, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 13:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

My comments were simply struck, with no indication/response given. I un-struck them. North8000 (talk) 16:18, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Struck because I had dealt with them. Farrtj (talk) 10:26, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Additional comments.

• Previous reviewer mentioned reference formatting. I did not go there as that is a not a requirement for GA.
• Uses the term "Brewery Conditioned" which is think is rare/ unclear for many. The internal link goes to a re-direct to an article which does not explain or even mention this term. Substitute a different term?

It's merely a more neutral term for "keg beer". "Keg" has become a term of derision in the UK. Farrtj (talk) 10:07, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Well that uses yet another unfamiliar-elsewhere term. In the US kegs are simply a packaging / purchasing method. Suggest using more explanatory wording in the article. North8000 (talk) 10:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Okay, click "keg" now and it redirects to "keg beer", which explains what the term means in the UK. Farrtj (talk) 10:26, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't see any such link in the article. But now I'm starting to understand. The term has sort of the opposite meaning in England vs. the US. In England it sort of means "less real" (because you have "traditional cask beer" to compare it to, which we don't have in the US) In the US it sort of means "more real" (e.g compared to canned beer) or "beer for a really big party" (vs. buying cans and bottles)North8000 (talk) 10:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I hope I've made things clear. Farrtj (talk) 10:44, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

That takes care of me but not the readers. But now I know enough to try to tweak it so that dummies like me can understand. North8000 (talk) 10:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks sufficiently resolved. North8000 (talk) 11:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

• The still remaining use of six sentences verbatim which are direct quotes of promotional material still makes it seem a bit promotional. But those quotes are informative. I would not fail or hold it for this but that's just a thought.

If you have a slight problem with them then I have no problem removing them. Look at what I've done for now, I think it fills the middle ground.Farrtj (talk) 10:26, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks good.North8000 (talk) 10:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

My only comments relevant to the GA criteria are mentioned above. I think it's nearly there. But since I first took this up today, either way I'd keep it open for several more days for others to comment. North8000 (talk) 20:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Issues that I had with respect to GA criteria have been resolved. I plan to pass this article. But since I just took it up a few days ago I'll leave it open a few more days in case there are other comments. North8000 (talk) 11:40, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Final recheck on evolved article

Well-written

Yes, suggested changes for clarity were madeNorth8000 (talk) 01:01, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Factually accurate and verifiable

Yes, looks good in this area. North8000 (talk) 01:01, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Broad in its coverage

Covers everything that I can think of. Quick web search found no material on major uncovered areas.North8000 (talk) 01:03, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each

Has had a few minor tweaks in the area during the review process. I decided that the main remainign material that might sound promotional )quotes from ads) is useful historical information. North8000 (talk) 01:05, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute

Yeas, very stable, no disputes. North8000 (talk) 01:06, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Illustrated, if possible, by images

Has one image, with article-specific rationale. With caption and alt text. More images would be nice but I know how tough that is in Wikipedia. North8000 (talk) 01:07, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I left this open some extra time for other comments. I pass it. I will implement details. If you wish to further refine it, one idea might be prose and organization that has the large amount of provided information items knitted together into more of a flow / continuity. Nice article! North8000 (talk) 01:09, 7 November 2012 (UTC)