Talk:Supermarket scanner moment/GA1

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

Reviewer: LunaEatsTuna (talk · contribs) 00:34, 23 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Hoping to get to this later today! Note: this is my first politics-related GAN, so please bear with me.  𓃦 LunaEatsTuna  (💬) 00:34, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Great article! Found it surprisingly interesting. I have placed this article on hold for one week and left some comments below. Please ping me once you have addressed my concerns so that I can know when to reevaluate. Thanks,  𓃦 LunaEatsTuna  (💬) 18:11, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Nice work on the changes! I am now pleased to pass this article for GA status. Congrats!  𓃦 LunaEatsTuna  (💬) 05:35, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio check
Earwig says good to go. Quotations are used in-line with WP:COPYQUOTE.

Files
The image is relevant, high quality and copyright-free:
 * : valid public domain rationale.

Prose

 * The lead looks to be on the shorter side and I wonder if it could perhaps be expanded at all?
 * I've expanded from all the sources I found, so I consider it quite complete, but open to anything else you think it's missing
 * If you have exhausted the content from all sources then that is a good sign for completeness.
 * "Pundits, broadcasters, political cartoonists" – wikilink pundits and political cartoonists.
 * The third paragraph in the body reads "The New York Times defended the report" – against whom? The first mention of accusations is the White House paragraph, although this states that Sulzberger replied and admitted the story was mildly exaggerated.
 * Mainly that it caused controversy and it stood by its reporting czar  23:31, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see now!
 * "became one of the most enduring American political myths, still alive 20 years later even after widespread refutation." – should it not read "has become one of the most enduring American political myths, still alive 20 years later even after widespread refutation." if it is still extant?
 * I think of "became" as a bit more future proof that it might not always be the case, whereas "became" is correct in both scenarios czar  23:31, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair point.
 * "the situation was an ready recipe" – should be a.

Refs
All sources used are RS. Passes spotcheck—no concerns with refs 1, 2, 5, 7 or 12. Note I decided to spotcheck all refs used more than once, although could not find access to ref 6, so randomly chose ref 12 instead.


 * Is there a reason why some refs have ISSNs whilst others do not?
 * The publication names of refs 10 and 11 should be wikilinked.
 * Mainly just habit and it helps identify periodicals that are sometimes not online (not the case here though). Ref 6 is linked in its page number, if useful. czar  23:31, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Other
Templates, External links and cats good to go.


 * Add WP:ALT text to the image.
 * Added the alt text but just noting this isn't part of the GA criteria :)
 * I think it is the least we can do for the visually impaired and our users who have images disabled on their browsers. Same for colours in tables that certain degrees of colourblindness cannot see. It helps to make Wikipedia assessable to everyone, and I low-key would want to see ALT text appear on every article one day, like short descriptions. But I do get that this is a personal choice, although adding alt text is not that difficult, and I feel like asking for its inclusion on GAs is a small but good start! Plus, I do trust that anyone nominating a GA should be relatively able to do this without much difficulty, and "refer to caption" is always a viable and valid alternative just in case.
 * I generally agree but not everyone does, hence the distinguishing between the review and non-review recommendations czar  04:51, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up!
 * Just curious—is there an appropriate navbox that could be added to this article?
 * Infobox event perhaps, as a stretch but also not everything needs one! czar  23:31, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I meant more in the vein of a navbox like template:George H. W. Bush etc. I am not familiar with political articles nor navboxes criteria for inclusion; I just noticed that this article is linked in said nav, so I believe it should be added here?  𓃦 LunaEatsTuna  (💬) 00:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes. I misunderstood. That should be relevant enough. Done! czar  04:51, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Great!

Reply
Thanks for the review, ! I've addressed everything above, for when you have a moment. czar 23:31, 23 January 2023 (UTC)