Talk:Church of Scientology editing on Wikipedia/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Arsenikk ^(talk) 11:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Citizens Commission on Human Rights in quotation marks? Similarly Project Chanology.
The sentence starting with "Professor David S. Touretzky..." is too long and needs to be broken up.
Avoid double hyphens (--) instead use endashes or emdashes.
When having an ' and " beside each other, use {{'"}} (results in '" instead of '".
In the sentence starting with "One of these pro-Scientology editors...", the hyphen should be converted to a dash.
Don't start sentences with digits; "10 members of..." should be "Ten members of..."
There should be a comma after "June 4, 2009".
Both Colbert and Kent are looking out of the screen; instead they should be looking towards the center by changing the alignment.
The first two see also posts are fine, but the rest are not. All three are not intuitive to a reader that does not know what they mean, and Project Chanology is redundant as it is mentioned in the article. At a few places in the article I was expecting the CoS' actions to be described as "Streisand effects". "Scientology versus the Internet" is mentioned both in the text and in its own navbox.

Placing article on hold. Arsenikk ^(talk) 11:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Nsk92

The infobox at the top of the page is referenced directly to the ArbCom decision. This is not appropriate since per WP:V, Wikipedia itseld cannot be used as a source. Nsk92 (talk) 12:21, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Responses to above suggestions

Done, removed quotation marks.
Done, split up sentence.
Done, removed double hyphens, used endashes and emdashes instead.
Done, as per recommendation, used {{'"}} instead of '"
Done, converted hyphen to dash.
Done, changed 10 to "Ten".
Done, added a comma.
Done, changed image alignment.
Done, removed recommended see also entries for removal, added others that are more relevant.
Done, removed primary source in infobox, added two secondary sources instead. Note that per WP:LEADCITE, that information was already cited, later in the body text of the article.

Thank you very much, these were helpful suggestions. Your recommendations have helped to improve the quality of this article. :) Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 16:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations with a good article. Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:51, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was a little uncertain of what category to place the article in at GA. If you have a preference for another category that "Websites and the Internet", feel free to move it. Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 23:01, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]