Talk:Pan Celtic Festival/GA1

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

Reviewer: Johanna (talk · contribs) 03:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Second on my "to review" list. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 03:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Comments
Here are some comments:


 * Lead
 * Link to celtic nations.
 * Do you really need a link to further down in the page?
 * Is it actually "Isle of Man are" or "Isle of Man is"? I don't know.
 * Linked.  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 
 * Unlinked.  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 
 * Changed to "is".  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 


 * Origins and history
 * Should not be a semicolon after "County Kerry, Ireland"--should be a comma instead.
 * What is the site that this entire section is cited to and why is it a reliable source?
 * Comma removed.  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 
 * There are several sites for the festival, for each of the nations. That one used is for the Welsh region and was the only one to contain any history and origins information.  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 


 * Participation
 * "is for Celtic nations which are…" comma between "nations" and "which"
 * I think you just need one cite to that source in the table--three is a bit overkill in my opinion.
 * Even though I admire your French tendencies, there probably shouldn't be an accent over debut. :)
 * Comma added.  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 
 * Citations removed.  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 
 * Actually the correct spelling uses the accent. Even now as I look at your text, my spell-checker has underlined your version in red, telling me that it is incorrectly spelt. British English appears to have adopted the accent version. Even Wiktionary advises on using the accent.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  09:27, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * National selections
 * If possible, could you put a paragraph giving a general overview of national selections? I found it a bit confusing when it just jumped right in.
 * "This annual festival takes place in the heart of the city" informal and vague
 * A couple consistency things: first, use similar terms when introducing each one, as it doesn't feel right if you start the Wales one with that it's a TV show.
 * Also, for some of the countries, you only discuss the most recent selections, and in otters, you only talk about the first ones. If you could do both, that would be great, but be consistent no matter what you choose to do.
 * I could add an overview paragraph. But then it would violate original research, as there are no available citations to verify such written overview content. Any suggestions?  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 
 * Reworded section.  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 
 * The Welsh selection is the only national selection to be televised. The other nations do not televise their selection shows.  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 
 * Again, I can only write about selections that are verifiable by citations. So not all of them will be consistent. If I were to attempt such, I would be in breach of original research.  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 


 * Hostings
 * This is not a good title for this section--in fact, it's not even showing up as a word on a dictionary search or when I typed it just now.
 * Title changed to "Festival hosts".  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 


 * List of winners
 * Remove the Dermot O'Brien file--this is actually a non-free file that's currently only being used in the subject's article and it's saying on the file description page that that's its only use, and I think it should stay that way.
 * Image removed.  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 


 * References
 * Ref 11 is dead.
 * Archived url added.  Wes Mouse  &#10002; 

Not too many comments! :) Johanna  (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 03:38, 5 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I won't be able to work on the points above as I have recently moved house, and still waiting for my internet provider to reconnect my services at the new property (expected to be October 12). I've only been able to send this via my cellular device, which was difficult in itself. I will make sure that the points are addressed as soon as my services resume.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  12:14, 5 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I have acted upon each of your points, and left comments for each of them.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  09:27, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your fixes! I can pass now. Johanna  (formerly BenLinus1214)talk to me!see my work 01:12, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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:
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: