Talk:Test Track/GA1

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

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 19:57, 31 July 2012 (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): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Why is fall in upper case?
 * ✅--Dom497 (talk) 22:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * "soft-opened" what does that mean?
 * Soft-opened/opening is used when something opens on a temporary basis and is not opened to the public for very long. In this case we are talking about a ride. Usually, rides may open a few days before its scheduled official opening to make sure the ride systems run smoothly and that there are no glitches. If you look at the pictures in ref 3, you can see a sign that says that Test Track may in counter long wait times in order to make adjustments. In short, soft-opening means when an attraction opens for the first time to the public as a "sneak-peak" opportunity for only a few hours to a day. Hope this makes sense!--Dom497 (talk) 22:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * " fanciful history" elaborate why it was fanciful
 * I basically added quick and very brief summary of World's of Motion. Good enough?--Dom497 (talk) 00:02, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * "After, new track was constructed outside of the building which is used as the high-speed test, work for Test Track continued inside the building. " strange wording
 * ✅--Dom497 (talk) 00:02, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * "Unfortunately, the ride programming" - remove the first word
 * ✅--Dom497 (talk) 22:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * "Jennifer Fickley-Baker" who is she?
 * ✅--Dom497 (talk) 22:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * "Capability, Efficiency, Responsiveness and Power" not keen about the capitalization
 * ✅--Dom497 (talk) 22:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * " The host, Bill McKim ( John Michael Higgins )" - The host, Bill McKim (John Michael Higgins), ..."
 * ✅--Dom497 (talk) 22:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * In "Ride overview", I would cite every paragraph for clarification
 * ✅--Dom497 (talk) 22:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Ref 5 missing publisher
 * ✅--Dom497 (talk) 22:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall: Not bad, although I muse whether it should be promoted if this was not opened.--Kürbis (✔) 09:54, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall: Not bad, although I muse whether it should be promoted if this was not opened.--Kürbis (✔) 09:54, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

Comments

 * Hi, would it be ok if the 5 days to fix up the issues start on Tuesday? I'm heading to my cottage right now and won't be able to make any changes to the article until I get back?--Dom497 (talk) 11:12, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have no problem with this. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 11:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I've fixed all the issues mentioned above.--Dom497 (talk) 00:02, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Pass Good work! =) Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 10:11, 7 August 2012 (UTC)