Talk:Beer/GA3

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''


 * 1) Clearly written, in good prose with correct spelling and grammar. Also look for proper formatting and organization of the article, with appropriate use of wikilinks, sections, table of contents, and general organization as described in those parts of the Manual of Style referred to in the Good Article criteria.
 * 2) Three images for the lead section is a little much. [[Image:Symbol question.svg|18px]] Trimmed
 * 3) The image and caption in "health effects" seem redundant. [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] Removed
 * 4) Alcoholic strength is a section that could be integrated in the ingredients section and the varieties section. Note that although alcohol is not part of the recipe, it is an ingredient.[[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] Integrated in varieties
 * 5) The header "Lambic beers: spontaneous fermentation" breaks style with the rest of the article, why not just call it "Lambic"? [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] Removed header
 * 6) The line "Plastic (PET) bottles are used by some breweries." seems more in place in "bottles" than in "cans". [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] Restructured section
 * 7) Factually accurate according to information in reliable sources, preferably with inline citations using either footnotes or Harvard references.
 * 8) The lead section of ingredients could do with verification. [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] 3 cites
 * 9) The yeast section is unreferenced [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] 5 cites
 * 10) In the ale section, the last three paragraphs go unreferenced, and might be original research, especially in the second last and last paragraph. The prose in those two paragraphs is also not as encyclopedic as the rest of the article. Rewritten and restructured. [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]]
 * 11) Most of "serving" goes unreferenced [[Image:Symbol question.svg|18px]] Some cites added. [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] - more cites added.
 * 12) Broad in coverage of the topic without unnecessary digressions.
 * 13) The sections on brewing industry and beer culture could be greatly expanded. [[Image:Symbol question.svg|18px]] Brewing industry has had some expansion
 * 14) Written from a neutral point of view.
 * 15) Stable, with no ongoing edit wars.
 * 16) Compliant with image use policy. If images are used, they should be free, licenses, or have fair use rationales in covered by Wikipedia's fair use guidelines.

Hope this helps some. Cheers, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  13:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments from
 * I was asked to weigh in here, so here's some comments.
 * Be sure the article complies with WP:MOSDASH. Right away I noticed a hyphen instead of an en dash or an unspaced em dash in the lead. [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] Dash inserted
 * Today, the brewing industry is a huge global business, consisting of several dominant multinational companies and many thousands of smaller producers ranging from brewpubs to regional breweries. "Huge" is a bit POVish. [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] Rewritten
 * For an article of such length, it would be good to see the lead fleshed out somewhat. [[Image:Symbol question.svg|18px]] Some expansion taken place
 * Maybe it's just me, but the history section seems very short for a subject with such a rich history. [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] Some expansion taken place
 * There are several one-sentence paragraphs, which should generally be avoided. [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] Dealt with.
 * As Martijn said, there is quite a bit of unsourced material. Be sure every paragraph contains at least one citation. [[Image:Symbol question.svg|18px]] 2 paragraphs still to be dealt with [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] Done
 * Per MOS, don't left-align images directly below level-3 headers, as it will break the page on some servers. [[Image:Symbol confirmed.svg|18px]] Done
 * The "Brewing industry" bit seems incredibly short. Is it possible to expand it? [[Image:Symbol question.svg|18px]] Some expansion taken place.
 * I see numerous unformatted citations. While consistently formatted references are not a requirement for GA, they are strongly recommended, and are part of the featured article criteria. [[Image:Symbol question.svg|18px]] A good number of these have now been improved.

I'm starting work on these suggestions. I note you guys have picked on areas that I have been aware were weak for some time, and have done little about (the history section for example!). Thanks for taking the time to work through this - already I feel that the article is being strengthened. I have taken a closer look at the bottles and cans section and have done a simple restructure that I feel improves that section considerably. Now I have to find some cites for that section! I have a query regarding alcohol as an ingredient of beer. I have looked at trying to integrate it into the Ingredients section, but I can't see how it is done as alcohol is not an ingredient as such, it is a product of the brewing process - it is not something that is there at the start, but, along with carbonation, is something that happens during the process, and is only there when the beer is finished. Alcoholic strength is of interest and importance to the article, and is something that can be built on further as it is an integral part of beer history. I feel it is appropriate that there is a separate section.  SilkTork  *YES! 18:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I see your point there on alcoholic content, and I don't know how it would be best integrated in the ingredients section. The way it dangles down there at the bottom isn't all that pretty either though. Can you come up with something clever? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've taken your second suggestion and moved it to the varieties section. It does make sense there, as strength is part of the variety of beer, along with colour and hops, etc. Thanks!  SilkTork  *YES! 00:27, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Almost there! I have ticked the bits that I think can be considered as done.  SilkTork  *YES! 15:45, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Though I still would prefer to see a longer industry section (which could be spun out into a seperate article at a later time?), once the citations are settled, consider this a Good Article. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 22:48, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If we can still get a reference or maybe two on the vessels, It seems it's time to promote. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * And solved. I'm promoting to GA status. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:00, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, time for tea, the cup that cheers and calms. Good job. -- MISTER ALCOHOL  TC 05:45, 29 December 2008 (UTC)