Talk:Colby cheese/GA1

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

Reviewer: The Most Comfortable Chair (talk · contribs) 09:06, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I will begin soon. — The Most Comfortable Chair 09:06, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

History

 * Are any of the differing accounts on its creation relatively significant? Or is it just the Joseph version that is popular enough to merit inclusion?
 * I've changed that part to clarify this: sources generally agree that Joseph Steinwand developed the cheese in 1885, but it isn't clear whether he did it intentionally. DanCherek (talk) 06:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "three thousand dollars" — Better to include its value in present times for perspective using the template — US$3000 → US$3000
 * Done, thanks! DanCherek (talk) 06:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Production

 * "as in the cheddar process" — Would "as in the cheddaring process" be more precise?
 * Cheddaring technically comes after the draining step, so not exactly. I tweaked the wording a bit to try to clarify this – (instead of draining all of the whey and cheddaring the remaining curds, only about two-thirds of the whey is drained). DanCherek (talk) 06:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Character

 * "The reduced acidity of the curd results in a mild and milky flavor, and it is always orange because it has been colored with annatto." — "and it is always orange because it has been colored with annatto" reads slightly awkward and bulky. Consider "and it gets its orange color from annatto" or something similar?
 * Changed it to your suggestion. DanCherek (talk) 06:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "Foodborne bacteria including Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus, and Salmonella often grow in cheeses with a moisture content greater than 50%, rather than hard or semi-hard cheeses like Colby." — Does this indicate that those bacteria absolutely won't grow in Colby or are they much less likely to? If it is the latter, it should be clarified perhaps, because the sentence is strongly indicative of the former.
 * Double checked the source and I've changed it to "more likely to grow" to indicate the latter. DanCherek (talk) 06:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

The article is really well-written, and there is very little for me to suggest. Great work on this. — The Most Comfortable Chair 07:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review! I've responded to each point above, let me know what you think. DanCherek (talk) 06:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Final
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * The article flows well, is illustrated appropriately, and is cited to reliable sources. It meets the criteria. Thanks to for their diligent work. — The Most Comfortable Chair 11:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * The article flows well, is illustrated appropriately, and is cited to reliable sources. It meets the criteria. Thanks to for their diligent work. — The Most Comfortable Chair 11:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * The article flows well, is illustrated appropriately, and is cited to reliable sources. It meets the criteria. Thanks to for their diligent work. — <b style="color:#000000">The Most Comfortable</b> <b style="color:#8A2BE2">Chair</b> 11:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The article flows well, is illustrated appropriately, and is cited to reliable sources. It meets the criteria. Thanks to for their diligent work. — <b style="color:#000000">The Most Comfortable</b> <b style="color:#8A2BE2">Chair</b> 11:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)