Talk:Pohang Space Walk/GA1

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

Reviewer: Taking up review. Toobigtokale (talk · contribs) 11:03, 4 February 2024 (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, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Some things to fix, see below
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * I need to give a closer read; for now high-level things
 * 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 non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Maybe caption could be improved though
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Maybe caption could be improved though
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Hey again, taking up the review 🙂 I'll write some more comments tomorrow. If you want to get started, I'm noticing a few small mistakes here and there that you should be able to spot. Here's some stuff to get you started: noticing at least one typo, incorrect link target, MOS:REPEATLINK, MOS:DASH, MOS:NUMNOTES, consistency in spelling out or abbreviating dates (MOS:DATEUNIFY). toobigtokale (talk) 11:03, 4 February 2024 (UTC)


 * @Toobigtokale: Thanks for reviewing this GAN - I appreciate it! I've made a couple of fixes per your comments; is there anything else I need to fix as of right now?  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 16:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Some more small things, will write more detailed comments in a few hours. I'm noticing the title of the article is italicized; is it because it is an art piece? If so, the name of the structure should be italicized throughout the body as well.
 * Also, the incorrect link target I spotted was Korean won. That's the currency of the Korean Empire. And a recommendation, I recommend you install this script: WP:VIZ. You have a few links that are redirects that don't really need to be redirects. This script will color-code those redirects so you can easily spot them.
 * And there's still some inconsistent date abbreviations vs full spelling. I'm of the opinion that you should just spell out all the months; things like abbreviations and contractions tend to be discouraged on Wikipedia unless it's like acronyms or in like a table or something. toobigtokale (talk) 02:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Toobigtokale: I've fixed the dates. Also, regarding on whether this could be considered an artwork or not...... really, I'm not too sure on that as it is more of an "experiential structure" than anything else so I just got rid of the infobox for now.  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 03:04, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if we should italicize... The only other similar structure I know about is the Vessel (structure) in NYC, and they italicize it on there, although it's not a GA/FA and precedence isn't everything.
 * On the other hand, MOS:NEITHER says Names of buildings and other structures: the Taj Mahal, the Statue of Liberty [should not be italicized].
 * Everything man-made can be considered art, but I'd say the Statue of Liberty, Pohang Space Walk, and the Vessel are closer to art than functional buildings... My sense is that we shouldn't italicize, per MOS:NEITHER. Consider using Template:Infobox building for now instead. toobigtokale (talk) 04:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, you refer to Pohang Space Walk as a "sculpture" in the article in a number of places. Sculptures are unambiguously art. Does that wording come from sources? If we're going to unitalicize, we need to be precise about how we choose to describe this structure. Can you go through and do a survey on what words reliable English-language/Korean-language publications use to describe this structure? toobigtokale (talk) 04:45, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I've looked at the sources and I've noticed that the Korean articles overwhelmingly use "조형물" (sculpture). In that case, do I still keep the infobox artwork?  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 22:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I think so. You should also make the terminology consistent in the article body.
 * Also, in either the first sentence or in a new second sentence, you can consider making clear that sources describe it as a sculpture, and maybe put two references next to it. I.e. first sentence "x is a walkable sculpture" or second sentence "x is often described as a sculpture by South Korean media." toobigtokale (talk) 22:11, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 *  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 22:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 22:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Some more things to address:
 * Italicization needs to be made consistent throughout the body.
 * The lead is currently too long; see WP:LEAD. The body of the article is not that long, and the lead is currently about equal length. Given the size of the body, the lead should be around two paragraphs. You currently have too much detail in the lead.
 * There's some prose stuff I'd like to address throughout the rest of the body; will take a copyedit round later when I'm satisfied with upcoming changes.
 * toobigtokale (talk) 08:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Toobigtokale: Thanks for giving the article a copyedit while I was away - I currently have a higher load of homework than usual that has been affecting my onwiki activity a little bit. I haven't been able to do as much except for checking my watch list a few times and reverting vandalism on my talk page. I have trimmed the lead further. As for italicization, once again should I italicize the name of the sculpture or not?  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 22:28, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I think you should italicize based on your findings. No rush; I'll be around. Good luck with homework! toobigtokale (talk) 22:29, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ for the italicization. (sidenote: I always seem to pick the worst times when nomming articles for recognition (i.e. when I am busy) .... last time I GAN'ed T Express I remember it was right before the first day of school!)  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 22:33, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Toobigtokale: Just so I know, is there anything else to fix with the prose as of right now or is that good? Also, what are some of your thoughts regarding the scope and content of this article?  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 14:42, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Scope and content seem ok on a quick glance, but I need to do a harder scan. I'll give quick updates for now and more feedback later. In your references, try linking the names of websites that have corresponding English articles, namely Yonhap News. The ones without articles you can leave as is.
 * The lead is still a little long. It's nearly a third of the article; should probably be around 1/4th at most. Some details you can trim, esp from the third paragraph. toobigtokale (talk) 00:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ Trimmed lead and linked Yonhap News.  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 01:14, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The history section seems to lack information about when construction began, and jumps right to when they did their first inspection. Hopefully it's possible to find that info; it's a bit of a jump to go from "they brainstormed, and now they're doing the final touches" toobigtokale (talk) 01:58, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * In Features, there's a couple violations of MOS:DASH. Try to address it and I'll tell you if you missed anything. toobigtokale (talk) 02:00, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Also there's a typo in Impact; try to spot. I've noticed and fixed several typos so far in this and the prev GA nom that I think you should been able to spot. I advise to give a few more nitpicky readthroughs yourself before nominating. toobigtokale (talk) 02:02, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ all - fixed the history section and hopefully got the dashes right and fixed the typo.  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 22:32, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The jump in the history section is still there I think; it goes from planning/brainstorming straight to final inspections. Is there no information about the construction process? toobigtokale (talk) 23:05, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I've added some information about the construction processes - hope that does it service. Meanwhile, I've also found some stuff about a new "Space Walk" being constructed in Gwangyang as well - maybe I can also add a little section on that too.  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 03:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I gave the stuff you added a bit of a scrub. Please do add that info in; once you do I think I'd be relatively satisfied with the detail level in the article. I'd then begin copyediting in earnest, then hopefully we can get this wrapped up. toobigtokale (talk) 03:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, had a huge exam just today and a huge project due last week - thank goodness I have more wikitime now to actually research for content and we can probably get finished with this.  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 03:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hope your school stuff's going well 🙂 As before, I'll be around, so happy to go at your pace. toobigtokale (talk) 03:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * One note; some names are currently incorrectly populated in the references. For example, : 장 is the last name. It's like this for several references; please give them all a scrub. toobigtokale (talk) 03:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ for the refs, for the Gwangyang stuff  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 03:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ for Gwangyang Space Walk.  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 04:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Currently doing a round of copyedits; I'll let you know when I'm done so we don't have edit conflicts toobigtokale (talk) 05:02, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok did some more copyedits, but I need to do another sweepthrough after you address these requests. I've left a few clarification requests.
 * Some notes on those:
 * For the "first interactive sculpture" claim, I'm skeptical. "Sculpture" is a broad term; are Buddhist statues that people are supposed to touch in temples considered "interactive sculptures"? Koreans love to claim x/y/z is the first, but I don't really buy this one. Simplest solution is just to delete this sentence.
 * Please change the "Gubong Mountain" link to match the requirement laid out here Naming conventions (Korean). Also, have you searched on the Korean Wikipedia to see if an article for this mountain exists? It may or may not, but just confirm. If it does, use a Template:Interlanguage link for it.
 * toobigtokale (talk) 05:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the Gubongsan to match naming convention requirements. This particular Gubongsan which is in Gwangyang does not have an article on kowiki or enwiki, unfortunately.  Prodraxis  ( talk ) 22:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok just got around to giving the article a few more passes. For future reference, here's some changes I made:
 * Added more pictures; these are great and it's nice of them to grant copyright permission for us to use them. I considered adding a picture of Tiger and Turtle, but my quick understanding of Commons:COM:FOP Germany makes me feel the picture on that structure's article is of dubious copyright status.
 * I found a Template:Interlanguage link for the German designers. I feel like it's an interesting detail that they're a married couple, so I included that.
 * I improved categories a bit. Try to familiarize yourself with the categories I used; I think you're likely to use these again in the future given your interests.

Overall, well done 🙂 Interesting topic, cool that you got permission to use pictures, and easy review process. Happy to review anything else you produce in future. Good luck with school! toobigtokale (talk) 06:29, 7 March 2024 (UTC)