Talk:On Growth and Form/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tim riley (talk · contribs) 21:23, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

After a first read-through I would have passed this very fine article for GA on the spot, but for one rather serious reservation: I am worried about the length of some of the block-quotes of (I assume) copyright material in the Reception – Modern section. In particular, the quotation from Cosma Shalizi runs to 258 words. I don't believe this conforms with our acceptable use guidelines: "Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used…" The guidelines don't define brevity, needless to say, but I don't think 258 words can be called a brief quotation. I really think some substantial paraphrasing and précis-ing is called for throughout this section. Otherwise I am full of admiration for a truly impressive article, which to my mind would meet all the GA criteria (and more) if it were not for this one sticking point.  Tim riley  talk    21:23, 10 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for taking this on, and for the warm words. "Brief" has never been defined formally, but it is generally taken with respect to the source, i.e. 7 lines of a 14-line poem is presumably long, but 7 lines of a 500-page book is probably fine. Looking back at it now, I agree that some of the Reception quotes could be briefer. I'll do some paraphrasing and précis-ing tomorrow morning. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:59, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, that's done, all long quotes gone. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:54, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Wow! That was fast work, and exactly what was wanted, I think.  Tim riley  talk    12:28, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:41, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: