Talk:Cross of Saint James/GA1

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

Reviewer: Etriusus (talk · contribs) 19:00, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

I'll take this on. I am a bit concerned about if this page has enough to stand alone as its own article (essentially WP:NOTE). I see that the page received a go over by the Guild of Copyeditors (User:Lindsey40186), but I am still on the fence. I'll start the review for now but I'm hard-pressed to see how 7 sources (and one bible passage) can predicate a standalone page. Likewise, the page is rather small and I'd be surprised if there wasn't more information that could be included. Please use the ✅ template, a strikethrough, or some other indication an issue has been resolved.

Sourcing

 * What makes bakingmad.com (FN 4) a reliable source?  ✓  swapped the source with a better source
 * What makes fsensations.com (FN 7) a reliable source? - Don't have a good answer for this
 * Please check FN 8, I think FN 8 and FN 7 are backward.  ✓ 
 * Neither footnote states he was 'beheaded' only killed via a sword. Here is a better source: Added source  ✓ 

Images

 * Most don't reach the threshold of originality to begin with.
 * No issues noted.

Copy-vios

 * Earwig picked up: '...in the form of a cross. It combines a cross fitchy with either a cross fleury...'  ✓  Fixed

Lead

 * A tad bit short in my opinion, really doesn't reflect the history or its uses.  ✓  added some more text

History

 * The division between use and history seems rather arbitrary. Either expand these sections to justify the individual sections or merge the sections.  ✓  Merged

Use

 * There are a couple of famous paintings that use this cross. Just one example
 * File:Giovanni Battista Tiepolo - St Jacobus in Budapest.jpg not the best representation
 * Perhaps just mentioning it in prose would suffice, the page is already rather image-heavy. Etriusus (Talk) 16:50, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The image above features a red Christian cross on the banner. There are other images. As this is about a symbol, the images are important. However, I'm not sure where to draw the line.

Design

 * Through google, I have found a source that gives a description on how the design changed over time. (not sure on the source's reliability though, It is referencing a youtube video so I'll see if I can track down the original citations.)

Comment after reviewing There is a lot out there that is not included in this page. While I believe that the article can likely stand on its own due to a large amount of info yet to be added, in it current form I am uncertain that it'd survive an AfD. As of now, it mainly is missing criteria 3a. To be frank, there really isn't a lot to comment on since its already been copyedited and has very little content. I don't like quick-failing nominations (as I feel it's unfair to nominators) so I'll leave the review open for now. If you need/want any help, feel free to ask. Etriusus (Talk) 19:17, 31 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I didn't know that size might be a criteria, but I expanded the article from 1900 characters to 3000 characters. I think I dealt with most of the issues above, and I think it's covering GAN 3a. It's been difficult finding RS in English, But I can continue to work on it. Your comments are appreciated. --evrik (talk) 17:16, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 * So there is no hard and fast rule on page size. 1000 words, between 15kB-25kB, or ~2000-5000 characters have all been brought up as criteria but there is no formal rule. I rose the issue because just a cursory look online found more content that could be included and a 6kB sized page is really pushing some limits. Ultimately, GA reviewers have discretion as even short articles can be GA quality if they cover the topic in a sufficient amount of detail. One example: Si Ronda is a featured article (promoted at ~10kb in size). Granted, there are pages that can likely never reach GA status because they're so small and that then becomes an AfD issue.
 * The work done so far looks excellent, I don't see as much of an issue with 3a anymore. I will give the page a full second pass later tonight. I'll also look for any additional content that might be worth including. Etriusus (Talk) 17:43, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Round 2

 * 'of which the ends of the arms are forked and rounded.' is the source (FN 1) in the wrong place?
 * 'The sword is said to represent both the courage of James,' I think a source got lost in the shuffle, neither the Acts passage nor the encyclopedia Britannica source supports this claim.
 * viajarycelebrar.com is a blog, is it reliable?
 * 'and carry out their daily devotions.' missing a source there
 * I placed FN 9 here, the content supports it (please double check)


 * A few more issues to note. Etriusus (Talk) 21:05, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I've been travelling the last few days. I will look at this later this week. Thanks for checking in. --evrik (talk) 17:12, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Evrik, any update on when you can address this? I hate to prod you since I am aware you're busy IRL. Etrius ( Us) 01:37, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Evrik It's been about ~10 days since you've been active. At this point, I am going to fail the page, mainly since I can't keep this review open indefinitely. I understand you are likely busy at the moment, and I am more than happy to pick this back up if/when you renom the page. Just ping me when you're ready. Etrius ( Us) 01:17, 17 September 2022 (UTC)