Talk:Silkie/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Silkie/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.


 * "{{harv|Smith & Daniel|1975|p=49" broken
 * en dash for page ranges please (including " 158-159)") per WP:DASH
 * " References" in alphabetical order by last name

Gary King ( talk ) 23:44, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

All done with those. I don't mean to be rude, but did you read the article or just scan it? It felt like less than five minutes between my nom and your review... Van Tucky 23:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Check my 67 other GA reviews :) I sometimes give a huge chunk of todos, or I give a preliminary review for quick MOS fixes and such, and then give further, more indepth comments. Gary King ( talk ) 23:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay :) Van Tucky 00:02, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Why "pp." for "(Ekarius 2007, pp. 159)"?
 * Why not just use "Louie, Elaine. "Now, a Chicken in Black", The New York Times, January 17, 2007." as a footnote and then use WP:REFNAME for it instead of using {{tl|harv}} for it? Without any page numbers, they could all use refname as it is, too.
 * I think that's it. It's a pretty short article, too, so it didn't take too long to go through, and the prose is pretty good as it is.

Gary King ( talk ) 23:56, 6 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll fix the pp in a second. As for the NYT, since I cite it multiple times, and for the other multi-cite sources I otherwise use the harv template, I wanted to keep it consistent. Of course you wouldn't cite a page number for 1-page news article. Van Tucky 00:02, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ref 19 doesn't use harv though :p Gary King ( talk ) 00:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Cause I only it cite it the one time. Besides, I'm just using the harv template for footnoting, not the technical Harvard citation style. Van Tucky 00:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Alright, that is not a big deal. One more thing: "pp. 158)". Gary King ( talk ) 00:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Done! Van Tucky 00:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I made a minor edit to an image caption, but beyond that, the article looks pretty good. Passing! I believe I've also eaten a few of these before :) Gary King ( talk ) 00:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)