Talk:Thank You, Omu!/GA1

This needs a copy edit, which I am happy to provide. Are you ok with that? Obviously you can revert anything you don't like or disagree with. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:05, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Copy editing has always been a weakness of mine. I would be very appreciative of any copyediting you do . Thank you for your time and for the time you've offered to spend. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:13, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Cite 3: THANK YOU, OMU! should be in title case.
 * Cite 10 is not correctly formatted. Likewise cite 16.

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:48, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Apart from the three issues above, that's all I can find. A nice piece of work.
 * Thanks. I made changes - did I fix what you were getting at with citations 10 and 16? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:58, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

The only remaining issues I can see are three further points around the formatting of citations.
 * 2 should give the publication year.
 * 3 has a random upright - |. The second "Kirkus Reviews" is not necessary.

Personally, I find this template handy. I keep it on a sandbox page, copy and paste it in as necessary and it gives me all of the criteria to complete. You may, or may not, find it helpful for future articles.


 * The first time (and hopefully not the last) anyone ever thought I was useful on Wikipedia was back in 2005 when I knew how to use the citation templates at the time and was sourcing stuff. Now-a-days I just use Visual Editor and so I'm bit surprised, given who have reviewed some of my previous nominations, not to have run into these limitations before. Anyhow I've fixed both 2 & 3. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:31, 18 June 2019 (UTC)


 * That made me laugh. I know that I have lauded your efforts in the past, and I would like to reiterate that praise. Wikipedia could do with more like you.
 * A cracking article. Happy to promote. Keep them coming. Gog the Mild (talk) 08:22, 18 June 2019 (UTC)