Talk:Chocolate in savory cooking/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

Nominator: Rollinginhisgrave (talk · contribs) 04:42, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Royiswariii (talk · contribs) 09:56, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	In Modern use section, there is a red wikilink could you explain that? There is an article for it on the French wiki, but not the English wiki.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	I will review the sources. All of them are reliable.
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	I will hold this until Rollinginhisgrave address and fix. Hi Rollinginhisgrave! I'm apologize if this GA are delayed due to my schoolwork. Overall, this is good article and I will approve this. You can promote this in WP:FACGO (See this criteria:WP:FACRITERIA), but i suggest to expand more this article to be considered this on FA. Royiswariii (talk) 09:33, 29 September 2024 (UTC) Thanks Royiswariii. Would you mind dropping a comment on WP:GAMENTOR before you pass this? I think having another pair of eyes would help with making sure all aspects of the GACR are evaluated. For instance, showing that you've completed a spot check, and I saw that you marked that there was not original research before you evaluated the sources. Thanks! Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 09:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Royiswariii when you have a chance, I've addressed your comment here. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 09:12, 29 September 2024 (UTC)