Talk:Icelandic Phallological Museum/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 18:25, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll review this article. However the dead link needs to be fixed. MathewTownsend (talk) 18:25, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Link fixed. oyasumi (talk) 18:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Comments

• "and an unfortunate stray polar bear" - "unfortunate" - not encyclopedic wording

Removed unfortunate. oyasumi (talk) 20:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

• "penis he owned as a child" - had owned since childhood, or had owned as a child?

I think had owned as a child is right here, but I'm not sure. oyasumi (talk) 21:13, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

• He put the museum up for sale in 2003, and offered it to the city of Reykjavík as a gift" - seem contradictory

He did both, nobody ever bought it and the city never accepted the gift. It was handed to his son in 2012. oyasumi (talk) 21:13, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

• "just the front tip" - all quotes need an immediate citation

• Is there a fee to tour the museum?

But wouldn't that be against WP:NOPRICES? oyasumi (talk) 20:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Reply

• You don't have to give the price. It can say "for a fee" or whatever.

Yes, there's a fee. 1000 Icelandic króna. I'm not sure where to put this in the article, though. oyasumi (talk) 21:15, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Interesting article, nicely presented!

MathewTownsend (talk) 20:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:

   B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Provides references to all sources:

   B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Main aspects are addressed:

   B. Remains focused:

4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• Doesn't matter about the fee. It's an interesting article, well done, and deserves to be a GA. MathewTownsend (talk) 21:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)