Jump to content

Talk:Metro (restaurant chain)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: MSG17 (talk · contribs) 01:17, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Sorry, I will quickfail this one as well. Most of the issues that were present in the other submission I reviewed, Bukit Kutu, exist here as well. Given that you have successfully nominated other articles for GA status in the recent past, I am rather surprised. Did you submit these articles too soon? is your account compromised in any way? Apologies for my bluntness, but seeing two articles in this shape after you have done much better in the past is concerning.

Here is a list of issues:

  • The grammar is not as bad as Bukit Kutu, but it has similar issues with tense switching, especially between time and singular/plural status. For example:

By the time of the closure, one burger costs 230 krona (US$1.87).
should be: By the time of the closure, one burger costed 230 krona (US$1.87).
There are many errors like this throughout the article, so I must quickfail on this basis.

  • Once again, there is simply a dearth in content. Most of the article is about the history of McDonald's in Iceland, and afterwards there are just a few statements about the restaurant. As this is So I will quickfail on broadness as well.

And some good points:

  • The references are used correctly, and all link to RSes. The only exception is Comptoir des Voyages - as a travel agency, I think it would not be a reliable source because it will be biased toward certain things in order to market destinations or their products and services. No original research is used.

Once again, I will say that with more work there is potential for this to become a GA. But right now, there's still a long way to go for that. MSG17 (talk) 01:17, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed