Talk:Dansk Datamatik Center/GA1

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

Reviewer: Buidhe (talk · contribs) 21:29, 19 January 2021 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

(t &#183; c)  buidhe  00:46, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Some c/e done, also see comments below
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * Ideally there would be identifiers such as isbn for all print sources, but I don't see that as necessary for GA level.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * "80 Kb code and 110 Kb data" I assume this is Kilobit but I'm not sure. It should be specified in the article.
 * "Well-formedness criteria were used to supply additional constraints on operations beyond what was defined by the abstract syntax." I am not quite sure what this means, possibly it should be rewritten to be more clear or include relevant wikilinks.
 * the Vienna Development Method — I think it would benefit from a bit more explanation what this is
 * What is OEM?
 * "A year later DDC-I, Inc. followed in the United States" doesn't explain the connection
 * "seeding them with as many as a hundred software designers and developers who had worked at DDC" -> the verb "seeding" is unnecessary jargon
 * "Well-formedness criteria were used to supply additional constraints on operations beyond what was defined by the abstract syntax." I am not quite sure what this means, possibly it should be rewritten to be more clear or include relevant wikilinks.
 * the Vienna Development Method — I think it would benefit from a bit more explanation what this is
 * What is OEM?
 * "A year later DDC-I, Inc. followed in the United States" doesn't explain the connection
 * "seeding them with as many as a hundred software designers and developers who had worked at DDC" -> the verb "seeding" is unnecessary jargon


 * Thanks very much for taking on this review. I believe I have now made changes to address all of your listed comments.  I also looked at your direct copyedits and I am fine with them, although in one case I further elaborated on the point being made.  Wasted Time R (talk) 23:50, 22 January 2021 (UTC)