Talk:BK Chicken Fries/GA1

GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Calvin999 (talk · contribs) 09:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm Calvin999 and I am reviewing this nomination. — Calvin999 09:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your time and work! I welcome any and all comments regarding this article. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 10:13, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some dead links likely need to be replacing
As Burger King is an American company, this is an American subject article. So all the dates should be American English, not British English. This goes for prose and references
- Not done - The date formatting for the citations is generated by the Wiki-templates. I prefer to use that standard when I generate citations through the Wiki-template generation software. Within the body of the article I use the North American date formats for dates. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
According to Burger King marketing, → I'd remove this, it makes Burger King sound really repetitive already
- Done - I reworded the sentence. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:10, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
their "standard" menu → No need to use quotation marks
- Done - Fixed. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The product was part → It was part
- Done - Fixed. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There's repetition of 'adult orientated' and 'larger'
- Done - Fixed. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:16, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
who will be → who would be ('will' implies that they will definitely buy it)
- Done - Fixed. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:18, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
They were discontinued in the United States in 2012, → You haven't said when they were introduced
- Done - It is mentioned in the body, I did put it into the lead. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:19, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As of the company's major offerings, → I think a word is missing here
- Done - Yep, "one" was missing. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:21, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
are sometimes the center of product advertising for the company. → are sometimes used in the company's product advertising.
- Not done - The wording choice is deliberate — I am stating that the product is sometimes at the center of advertising campaigns that is directly hawking the particular product, not simply used as part of the campaigns. The difference is important, your wording implies that they are not the main focus of advertising but simply something that is simply a component. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:26, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why did Slipknot have a problem?
- Done - Fixed, I clarified the statement. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:30, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As noted, → Remove
- Done - Fixed. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:30, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
amounts of mention on → Awkward phrasing
- Done - Fixed. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
in one form another → in one form or another
- Done - Fixed. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
average one every → average once every
- Done - Fixed. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In its 2014 third-quarter → In the third-quarter of 2014
- Done - Fixed. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
are breaded and → Link breaded if possible?
- Done - Fixed. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
the 2015 introduction → Shouldn't it be 're-introduction' ?
- Done - Fixed, yep. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
a trademarked a patented, → This doesn't make sense.
- Done - Fixed, Should be "and" not "a" --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The package design won an honorable mention at a packaging industry design competition. → Which one and when?
- Done - Fixed, I updated the link and specified who gave the award. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:51, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
the ire of → What is ire?
- en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ire, second definition. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 2: Link CNN
- Comment: I usually don't link publishers unless they are more obscure. As it is not a requirement of citations to link sources, I prefer not to clutter up the section with extraneous links. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 3: Link NY Times
- Comment: As above --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 4: Who published this?
- Done - Newsweek --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 6: Link Business insider
- Comment: As above. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 7, 8 and 9 are self published and can't be used
- Comment: According to the the MoS, these kinds of links can be used if they are used to establish verification of the existence of a subject, not for usage of information contained within them to verify facts. What I doing is using them is to verify the claim I am making that someone started these particular social media sites on that subject of bringing back chicken fries. What I am not doing is using the content of these sites as verification of a claimed statement about Chicken Fries (that would be unreliable). --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Most publishers haven't been linked
- Comment: As above. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome

On hold for 7 days. — Calvin999 20:02, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for being prompt. Passing. — Calvin999 07:35, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.