Jump to content

Talk:The Liquor Store/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Gerald Waldo Luis (talk · contribs) 06:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've been jogging and sailing and flying, and landed here. Way to go on the restaurant GAs! Willing to see this be a GT. I hope to finish this review before Chinese New Year. GeraldWL 06:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Waldo Luis, Thanks! Yes, methinks some XLB dumplings may be in order! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:33, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Another Believer, believe it or not, I never made XLBs, let alone eat. It looks alluring though! Even in my city with a huge amount of ethnic Chinese, it looks like PDX has more Chinese restaurants. Would love to see how things work there-- heard they have a special custom. GeraldWL 15:47, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gerald Waldo Luis, I've been obsessed with XLB since visiting Shanghai (I've been to China three times). Portland has a great food scene, as you can see from your many restaurant reviews, but I wish our Chinatown was more vibrant. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:54, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Another Believer, not gon' lie, the Chinatown in Portland looks funny. Givin' some Texas vibes, if I'm allowed to stereotype. GeraldWL 16:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gerald Waldo Luis, Well, I'm from Texas originally, so you just might see some Texas restaurant articles at GAN, too. :) ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:54, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lead and infobox

[edit]

So as usual I'm just gonna look at the prose first. Then I'll further look at the criteria.

Description

[edit]

History

[edit]
Events
[edit]

Closure

[edit]

Reception

[edit]
  • Learned a lot since my first GA review. I suggest giving WP:RECEPTION a read. The section has a lot of "A x B" stuff, which makes it repetitive. Try twisting things-- seems impossible, but you'll not regret the copyedited result. GeraldWL 15:40, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Gerald Waldo Luis, I've made one minor edit, but in general I am comfortable with the current wording. I will also be requesting a copy edit from the Guild of Copy Editors as soon as possible, so the reviewing editor may also tweak a thing or two. Hopefully the current prose is GA-worthy at least. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:56, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Overall

[edit]

Sorry for the wait, Another Believer! Chinese New Year was definitely a distraction. Anyway, I'm happy to elect this to GA! I do see the AFD though, and I have no opinions on the worthiness of the inclusion-worthiness of this article. As Hog Farm pointed it out, GAs don't determine notability, and consensus can change. Enough with the small-talk, nice effort on improving Portland articles! GeraldWL 08:34, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:39, 17 February 2021 (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
The discussion above 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.