Talk:Euclidean geometry/GA1

GA Review

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

Hello. I am going to have to fail this article's GA nomination, due mainly to referencing issues, but also to a few other things. Here is a list of the major issues that need to be addressed:

The main problem is that the article is severely under-referenced. There are many sections that completely lack references, and most sections have at least one paragraph that is unreferenced.

Added a bunch of references.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 01:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Web references need to be formatted with a publisher and access date at the very least.

Done.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 01:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The references section has two books listed in the bullet point part that aren't present in the in-line references. Books that aren't used for in-line references should be removed altogether or moved to a "Further reading" section.

Fixed.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 22:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of really short paragraphs and really short sections. These need to be either expanded or combined. As they are, they make the article look very choppy and harder to read.
The Euclid proof image in the Axiomatic treatment section needs some tweaks made to its licensing.

Can you explain what the necessary tweaks are? It's not obvious to me what the problem is.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 22:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to the image page, the license says "Note: This tag should not be used anymore!", and then gives a list of licensing options to choose from to replace the deprecated tag. Dana boomer (talk) 00:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks. Fixed.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 01:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The first two images in the gallery in the Some important or well known results section need descriptions added to their image pages.

Fixed.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 22:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The formatting of the image gallery in the Applications section needs to be tweaked - the last image falls off the page.

Changed formatting. This will of course depend on your browser and screen.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 22:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Once these issues are taken care of and a full copyedit is completed, please feel free to renominate this article at GAN. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Dana boomer (talk) 18:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments! Some of these I'll fix, others I'll leave to other people.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 22:06, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Dana boomer, for the helpful comments on the article. I think most of them are now pretty much taken care of, with the possible exception of references (not sure if they're sufficient now), and the definite exception of the choppiness, short paragraphs and short sections. I assume the latter was mostly referring to the section on applications, and I think that's a symptom of the fact that the application section is thin, and lacks any kind of narrative thread, transitions between topics, etc. That's not something that can be taken care of with a quick fix.--76.167.77.165 (talk) 07:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]