Talk:Accurate News and Information Act/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Arsenikk (talk) 14:05, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Some comments:
- You say "drove at least one newspaper out of business". Does the source say which one?
- The sentence "Says Finkel, finding fault with both sides of the Aberhart-press feud," needs to have "stated" or "wrote" or something with a colon, if it is the sources of the quote below.
- Some small copyediting. (fixed)
- "Ultra vires" needs to be wikilinked. (fixed)
To small matters, and the article will pass as good. Nice work so far :) Arsenikk (talk) 14:05, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review and copyedits. Unfortunately, the source does not name the newspaper, so there's not much I can do there; I think there's value in stating that one was driven out of business, even if we don't know which one, but I'm open to being persuaded otherwise. On the Finkel quote point, can you explain why this is necessary? I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'd just like some explanation of why you're right. Sorry for being a cantankerous fart. Steve Smith (talk) 14:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- I've read the sentence a dozen times, and I cannot see how it creates a transition between the "finding" and the quote. Or to put it this way: I cannot see how the sentence says that Says Finkel says the quote.
- Oh, okay; I misunderstood you. I thought you were saying that a colon was required, which doesn't seem right to me, when it's just that my writing was unclear. "Says Finkel, finding fault with both sides of the Aberhart-press feud," is an inversion of "Finkel says, finding fault with both sides of the Aberhart-press feud" or, more likely, "Finkel, finding fault with both sides of the Aberhart-press feud, says". It is a little cutesie, though, so I'll go ahead and change it to something more straightforward. Steve Smith (talk) 15:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Good, then we are agreed, and I will pass the article. As always from you, nice work, and if I must say, a rather scary article. I honestly though no-one could dream up introducing such censorship in a "free" country. Arsenikk (talk) 16:08, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, okay; I misunderstood you. I thought you were saying that a colon was required, which doesn't seem right to me, when it's just that my writing was unclear. "Says Finkel, finding fault with both sides of the Aberhart-press feud," is an inversion of "Finkel says, finding fault with both sides of the Aberhart-press feud" or, more likely, "Finkel, finding fault with both sides of the Aberhart-press feud, says". It is a little cutesie, though, so I'll go ahead and change it to something more straightforward. Steve Smith (talk) 15:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- I've read the sentence a dozen times, and I cannot see how it creates a transition between the "finding" and the quote. Or to put it this way: I cannot see how the sentence says that Says Finkel says the quote.
- Thanks for the review and copyedits. Unfortunately, the source does not name the newspaper, so there's not much I can do there; I think there's value in stating that one was driven out of business, even if we don't know which one, but I'm open to being persuaded otherwise. On the Finkel quote point, can you explain why this is necessary? I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'd just like some explanation of why you're right. Sorry for being a cantankerous fart. Steve Smith (talk) 14:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC)