Talk:Rosetta (restaurant)/GA1

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

Nominator: 02:52, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: That Tired Tarantula (talk · contribs) 06:44, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I'll be reviewing this article during the next few days. That Tired Tarantula  Burrow  06:44, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Criteria

 * No maintenance templates: ✅
 * Relavent images are present: ✅
 * No recent edit wars: ✅

Copyright

 * No copyright violations/plagiarism: ✅
 * Images are free (unless a rationale is given if they are not) and tagged: ✅

Broadness and focus
The article stays focused and has all the sections that an article about a restaurant should have and there is no significant information omitted. Looks good.

Writing and MoS
The article is very well-written and follows MoS guidelines.

There's one little spot that I noticed at the start of the second paragraph of the reception section:

The first part of this sentence is a bit wordy, so could it be changed to something like, "For the magazine Chilango, Miguel Rivera..." and then the rest of the prose could be kept the same?
 * "Miguel Rivera recommended for the magazine Chilango bread and pasta because of their cooking style; a reviewer from Bon Appétit shared the opinion and approved the pasta."
 * Reworded

Neutrality
At first, I was a bit conerned about due weight, since there are only positive reviews presented in the article, but after looking onine, there doesn't seem to be any mixed or negative reviews from reliable sources. There's a couple words to watch, but they help out with explaining things and making the writing in the article flow; assumptions aren't made.

Evaluating sources
All of the sources are reliable, secondary, and independent.

Citation accuracy
1. The restaurant having reservations is kind of an indirect assumption, but it's a reasonable one; I'm not concerned about it.

2 and 3. Where do the sources mention the restaurant being a la carte?
 * I changed them with a more explicit source

6 and 7. Same as with the first reference, the cities or states that the towns and areas are located is inferred, but it's logical, so it's fine.

7. The source mentions how the dough has been fermenting for nine years, but doesn't mention when the restaurant was first made.
 * Reworded. (CC) Tb hotch ™ 04:50, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

21. The Michelin guide doesn't mention how it is the first year for restaurants in Mexico to be rewarded Michelin stars.
 * Sourced.

Everything else looks good.

Overall
Everything meets the GA criteria. Excellent article; great work!