Talk:2017 Catalan general strike/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Kingsif (talk · contribs) 03:43, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
I'll review this, comments will be here soon Kingsif (talk) 03:43, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
Style
[edit]- Lead a bit too long for article length
- The note on national unions doesn't need to be in brackets
- 'Planning' would be better titled 'Background'
- The sentence "Firefighters and the Catalan police served as supportive, improvised order at some protests" doesn't really make sense - improvising order?
- "Seven Nation Army" should be styled like that ("Seven Nation Army"), not in italics - could also add that it's a song by the White Stripes
- Some odd word usage (possibly from a direct translation of flowery language) that I've replaced with more common terms
- Generally good - just the fixes mentioned above
Coverage
[edit]- Lead also a bit too detailed - a lot of it could be moved to 'Planning'
- Coverage suitable and well-managed
- Pass
Illustration
[edit]- Unusual top image (media), but it works
- Good use of media
- Pass
Neutrality
[edit]- Fine
- Pass
Verifiability
[edit]- Sources look good, and are predominantly English
- Pass
Stability
[edit]- Been stable for over a year
- Pass
Copyright
[edit]- Media appropriately licensed
- Check looks good
- Pass
Overall
[edit]- on hold A few style things and a sentence that doesn't make sense. Kingsif (talk) 18:47, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Czar: Kingsif (talk) 22:23, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
- Hi @Kingsif, appreciate the review! Believe I've addressed your above points in prose except for the national union parenthetical, which I kept as an aside. Let me know what you think and thanks for your time. czar 15:15, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Czar: I find the lead still a bit too long, even with the wide montage - is there any way to remove one of the paragraphs? Kingsif (talk) 16:27, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Kingsif, done, though I think the lede is weaker for the loss of detail. czar 17:33, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
- The lead is just an overview, and it still hits the main points - the article body is for all the detail, and I think it's now got a good balance! Kingsif (talk) 17:39, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Kingsif, done, though I think the lede is weaker for the loss of detail. czar 17:33, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Czar: I find the lead still a bit too long, even with the wide montage - is there any way to remove one of the paragraphs? Kingsif (talk) 16:27, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Well done
- Hi @Kingsif, appreciate the review! Believe I've addressed your above points in prose except for the national union parenthetical, which I kept as an aside. Let me know what you think and thanks for your time. czar 15:15, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
