Talk:The finger/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cirt (talk · contribs) 04:38, 6 October 2012 (UTC) I will review this article. — Cirt (talk) 04:38, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of October 12, 2012, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: The article is indeed quite readable and good structure throughout.

2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited to proper sources.

3. Broad in coverage?:

Covers main aspects of topic.
However, for those wanting to know more, I'd suggest please including a See also section with five (5) or so relevant links to other related Wikipedia articles, a Further reading section, with four (4) or more books on the subject matter, and perhaps three (3) or more External links in that section as well.
Structure: I'd suggest splitting the Origin section into a couple or more subsections, perhaps by chronological time period. (Retaining the Origin main subsection on top of those 2 children subsections).
Cultural impact: Maybe this section could be split into 2 sub-headings under it, as well.
After the GA Review is completed, I'd strongly suggest going for a Peer review and soliciting input from previously uninvolved editors and also posting notices to WikiProjects, as the next step going forwards.

4. Neutral point of view?: Written in a clear and neutral tone throughout.

5. Article stability? Article is stable, upon inspection of article edit history and talk page history and archives. Please monitor this going forwards.

6. Images?: Image review passes.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. — Cirt (talk) 17:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've split the "Origin" section into a few subsections. I think you're right that the "Cultural impact" section could use a few subsections to better organize the material, and I'll think about how to do that. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found a few relevant books on Google Books and have listed them as "Further reading". – Muboshgu (talk) 17:33, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great so far! I'd suggest maybe 4 or so more See also entries, one more Further reading entry, and I'll see about finding some related portals for See also, and then 2 or 3 more links in External links section. — Cirt (talk) 18:13, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the added see also's. I was still in the process of thinking about what to add there. I'm sorting through some potential EL's now, just want to make sure they meet EL criteria. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:29, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, no worries, — Cirt (talk) 18:30, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Got three in the EL section now. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update

Promoted to WP:GA. — Cirt (talk) 18:39, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! – Muboshgu (talk) 18:43, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]