Jump to content

Talk:Play-Doh/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

The "Creation" subsection should contain references. Beyond that, this may be a quick pass. I will now take some time to examine the sources. PSWG1920 (talk) 01:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am uncertain whether several web-based sources used here meet WP:RS. I'm also concerned with the choppiness of sections. Unfortunately I may have to withdraw from this review due in part to computer problems (slowness.) Not sure exactly how to go about that without leaving a mess. PSWG1920 (talk) 22:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, I can take over from here. Hello, I'm Weebiloobil (talk · contribs), and I will be continuing this review. Feel free to prod me ask me relevent questions. The review should be ready within a week; we'll see how things go from there. Hello again! - weebiloobil (talk) 23:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Review

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


The reviewed version can be found here

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    Good, if a little basic. One issue around WWII I fixed myself
    B. MoS compliance:
    Shame about the lack of an external Links section, but not required at GA stage
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    The lead could do with a couple of references; "a considerable amount of ancillary merchandise" would at least require a citation
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    Ideally, there would be a 'Usage' section, describing its main properties; this should not be restricted to the lead
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    I'm putting the article on hold until the lead recieves a citation. Feel free to contact me when you think you have done; if not, I shall return in 7 days. Auf wiedersehen! - weebiloobil (talk) 16:12, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome

[edit]

Well, it seems that you've done everything I asked for, which means that this article has succesfully passed as a Good Aticle. Well done! But the fun doesn't stop there. As always, Good Article nominations has a backlog, so it would be really great if you could help out by reviewing an article or 20. The Spring 2009 backlog clearance drive is not yet over! </plug> Once again, well done on the article - weebiloobil (talk) 09:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Generic playdoh

[edit]

I know one can buy play-doh type products, and something very similar can be made simply at home (water/salt/flour/food-colouring): Is there a name to call these things other than "generic play-doy stuff"?YobMod 07:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]