Talk:Wikipedia and the COVID-19 pandemic/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: LunaEatsTuna (talk · contribs) 16:59, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Looks interesting! I will review this (hopefully) later today. ツLunaEatsTuna (💬)— 16:59, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Okay! Per your changes implemented I am now happy to pass this article for GA status. Congrats! ツLunaEatsTuna (💬)— 05:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio check

• The quotation from Renée DiResta is a concern.
  • It's been rephrased; if it's still too close, do you think it's worth keeping?
    • Yes, it looks good now!
• The sentence starting "According to Wikimedia Foundation spokeswoman Chantal De Soto, as of the end of July 2020," is too closely paraphrased.
  • I actually just cut this phrase; the first paragraph of that section details editor statistics during 2020, so I don't feel this is necessary as it's not the most up to date information.
    • Good choice.

Everything else is good per WP:COPYQUOTE.

Files

All images used are appropriate, relevant, of good quality and copyright-free:

File:WMF coronavirus pandemic message 2.png: CC-BY-SA 3.0;

File:FACT- 5G mobile networks DO NOT spread COVID-19.svg: CC-BY-SA 3.0;

File:Screenshot of the Template for the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on the English Wikipedia as of 2021-04-03.png: CC-BY-SA 3.0;

File:Wikiproject viewership march 2020.png: GNU General Public License;

File:WikiProject COVID-19 Urdu Logo.svg: CC-BY-SA 4.0;

File:Wikimedia Summit 2019 - Portrait Sandister Tei (1).jpg: CC-BY-SA 4.0;

File:WikiArabia '19 517 (cropped) (cropped).jpg: CC-BY-SA 4.0.

Prose

• Wikilink the first mentions of COVID-19 and COVID-19 pandemic in the body as they are relevant to understanding this article.
  • Done
• "In mid-March 2020" – in all other instances only the month is mentioned.
  • I believe this clarifies when in March it was written because March 2020 was when most lockdowns happened across the U.S.; an article written on March 1, 2020 would have a very different perception of COVID than an article written on March 30, 2020. Does march have a 31st? Eh, who knows anymore.
    • Ah, I see! That is fair enough.
• "Wikipedia experienced an increase in readership during the COVID-19 pandemic." – this line could probably be mentioned in the first paragraph.
  • Added
• "Wikipedia editors have averaged" – change to "Wikipedia editors had averaged"
• "(to pandemic-related pages)." – are the parentheses necessary? Also:
• "pandemic-related pages" is slightly ambiguous as COVID-19 was not immediately declared a pandemic.
  • To address the last three, I rephrased the sentence to be past tense and to fit the changes
    • Looks good.
• "there were nearly 7,000 Wikipedia articles" – Wikipedia articles is redundant IMO; just articles should work fine.
  • Fixed
• CNET should not be italicised.
  • Fixed
• "setting up "sock puppets" accounts" – change sock puppets to singular.
  • Fixed
• The quotation from Renée DiResta is far too long.
  • Fixed, as addressed under "Other"
• Wikilink media ecosystem.
  • Fixed
• The paragraph starting "One study found that Wikipedia's coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic from January to May 2020" feels out of place to me. I would perhaps move it near the top of the article?
  • Moved to be the second paragraph under "Wikipedia"
    • More fitting :)
• "study showed that nearly 2% of COVID-19-related literature" – change to "two percent" per MOS:%.
  • Fixed
• The sentence starting "On 16 June 2021, Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee closed" does not seem notable. I can see why it is included, but the only citations for it are to Wikipedia itself. Also, most non-editors will likely not find this interesting.
  • I've cleaned up this paragraph. Do you feel the sourcing complies with WP:ABOUTSELF?
    • Looks to be.
• "known as WikiProjects helped to steward the English Wikipedia's pandemic coverage," – steward?
  • I've seen steward used to describe supervision before, but I've replaced it, as I do agree it's an odd choice of words
    • Thanks—noted.
• I would add some more context to the paragraph about the 2020 Tablighi Jamaat COVID-19 hotspot in Delhi article, like mentioning why/to whom it caused controversy.
  • Done; I did add some citations too, in case you need to take that into consideration for spotchecking.
• "to the English Wikipedia had increased by 20% due" – "20 percent".
  • Fixed
• Most of the information about other language editions of Wikipedia are from early and mid-2020 (which makes sense as that is when media interest kinda peaked). Are there any notable updates available since then?
  • I don't believe so; searches through Google News and Scholar show no results for the different things mentioned. Sadly, it seems that reporting on COVID has seriously curbed since 2020.
• "India's Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and National Health Authority, and the World Health Organization to improve coverage." – World Health Organization is a duplicate link.
  • Fixed
• "The Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit organization" – Wikimedia Foundation is a duplicate link.
  • Fixed

LunaEatsTuna I believe I've addressed everything here. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 22:27, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Refs

Spotcheck:

• 1 Y
• Ref 2b:
  • The WP article states "had become the 4th most viewed article on the website of all time" whilst the cited article says the COVID-19 pandemic entry was only thirty-fourth.
    • Huh, that's odd; probably a typo from the editor, but thanks for finding that, that is a pretty major piece of info to be skewing. I also added some up to date info to that paragraph if you need to take a look.
• Ref 3c
  • I see no mention of "The "In the News" section of the English Wikipedia's main page dedicated a section to links containing information about the COVID-19 pandemic".
    • @LunaEatsTuna: Hm, that is odd; I have an alternative source, but it's an archived main page from Wikipedia in July. Would this be acceptable to cite?
      • Well, if it is not mentioned in any news sources than it is probably not really notable unfortunately.
        • @LunaEatsTuna: Alright then, it's been cut. I believe I've addressed everything here. Thank you for reviewing! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 04:20, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
          • You are most welcome :3 ツLunaEatsTuna (💬)— 05:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
• 4 Y
• 5 Y
• 10 Y
• 12 Y
• 24 Y

I'll stop here :). @MyCatIsAChonk: Spotcheck done. This plus my new point about the External links below (very bottom) are my only two concerns than I believe I should be able to pass this. ツLunaEatsTuna (💬)— 23:20, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Formatting

• Wikilink the publication names of refs 2, 15 and 33.
  • Added
• Is a non-URL publication name available for ref 18?
  • Respectfully, what do you mean? Are you referring to the paywall? If that's the issue, I've added an archived URL.
    • Ah, I mean News-Medical.net; is that its official name or is it News Medical etc?
• Ref 41 is missing a publisher.
  • Fixed

Other

Section formatting, See also, navboxes, portals, other templates and categories good.

• The short description is really vague; how about "Wikipedia's response to a world event" or something similar to that?
  • Changed to "Wikipedia's response to global pandemic"
• Recommend adding template:Use X English.
  • Added
• Please add WP:ALT text if you can.
  • Added
• Minor cosmetic error—some headings have initial and succeeding spaces whilst others do not. This is a super easy fix but due to how even they both are I could not assess which style was the preferred one :3
  • What do you mean by this? I apologize for my lack of understanding, but I don't quite know what you're referring to; the headings look fine on my end (to clarify, I'm using the Vector 2022 skin).
    • When you click edit, == Wikipedia == (spaces) and ===German Wikipedia=== (no spaces). Actually, perhaps they do not have to be consistent… eh, I will let you decide. ツLunaEatsTuna (💬)— 20:13, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
      • Ahh, I see now. It's been fixed.
• In External links, I would move Thalen and "Meet some of the women sharing …" to Further reading and remove the remaining two Medium sources. They feel somewhat excessive IMO.
  • All fixed now

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.