Talk:Roman Candle (Portland, Oregon)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 13:57, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures[edit]

  • It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
  • It contains copyright infringements -
  • It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
  • It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -

Links[edit]

Prose[edit]

Lede[edit]

  • The link after the name seems weird. Can we not cite the name in the body? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:31, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lede seems to miss out a lot of stuff, and primarily doesn't explain why this restaurant is any more notable than any other one. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I've expanded a bit, but don't want to include too many minor details. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:57, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Italian food is cited in the infobox, can we not cite this in the body instead? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

General[edit]

  • Should the history not come before the description? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Lee Vilenski, The current framework is consistent with the other GA restaurant articles I've written. I think, generally speaking, people are curious to get a description of the restaurant before learning its history. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:34, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There doesn't seem to be much on the formation, or the reasons why the candle was opened. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "custom tiles and marble ... offset by communal tables hewn from Oregon walnut wood",[1] as well as "thick-wooded" cases displaying pastries and pizza. - if we quote, we must say who said ths. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
     Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:52, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 2014, The Oregonian's Michael Russell described the clientele as "young mothers, runners in performance tights and freelancers in knit caps and turquoise rings tapping away on open laptops." - what point are we making with this quote? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Lee Vilenski, Describing the clientele, aka, the sorts of people who tend to visit the restaurant. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:36, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wikipedia's voice is not making any statements here though, which is the issue. Something like: The Oregonian's Michael Russell described the restaurant being towards a trendy crowd, commenting that the clientele was "young mothers, runners in performance tights and freelancers in knit caps and turquoise rings tapping away on open laptops." - or similar. Without additional info, this is just what someone said, which we haven't expanded on, and haven't made a point. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      Better? ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:10, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "With a quarry's worth of tile on the walls and bathrooms fit for a Roman senator, the room is a bit of unadulterated glossy magazine catnip." - similar. I don't have a clue what this means. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    This is how someone described the interior, which was heavily tiled. They are saying there's a ton of tile on the walls and within the bathrooms, looking like "a bit of unadulterated glossy magazine catnip". I don't find the quote confusing, but I'm willing to present differently if you have suggestions. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:44, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • meat sandwiches - unless they are literally sandwiches with only meat in them, this is a bit specific. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
     Fixed The source says "meaty". I've removed "meat" so readers are not confused. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:49, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who from the Thrillist said these quotes? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    If I knew, I'd say. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:37, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a spin on the sloppy joe with beef and pork ragu stuffed into a triangle of focaccia-esque bread" - is this from the restaurant, or from Thrillist? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Lee Vilenski, Neither. This was said by Michael Russell of The Oregonian. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:39, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Should really state that then. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
     Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:11, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • proscuitto - is this spelt wrong? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
     Fixed ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:39, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's actually a series of quotes in this artile after this point. Make sure they are attributed and that they couldn't be condensed? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Many restaurant articles summarize critical reception and include quotes. I've attribute as possible based on sourcing. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:48, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Quotes aren't the issue, it's more that we should try to condense them wherever possible. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm all ears if you have specific suggestions. I think the current level of detail is appropriate. The Russell review is quite long and I based my summary on Eater Portland's summary of the review. I think three paragraphs with one extended quote seems reasonable! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:16, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • On April 20 - WP:EASTEREGG link. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! I've linked "unofficial observance" instead of "April 20". ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:41, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • an unofficial observance - I don't know what this says Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Lee Vilenski, "unofficial observance" meaning "unofficial holiday". Do you suggest something different? See 420 (cannabis culture). ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:42, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Unofficial holiday is significantly better. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
     Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:12, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • As of May 4 - I'm not sure what you mean by this? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Lee Vilenski, There was a transition during April-May, so I wanted to describe what the establishment was serving, as reported on May 4. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:45, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Could we just say in May 2016? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Lee Vilenski,  Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:13, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reception attributes quotes to magazines, and not the writers. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I attribute to authors when possible. Sometimes outlets publish content without citing specific authors. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:46, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Review meta comments[edit]

As a note, as I'm also picking up Talk:XLB (Portland, Oregon)/GA1, there may be some overlap. Don't think I'm nagging. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:58, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Gerald Waldo Luis[edit]

Unfortunately I can't review it as I was busy at the time. Got some comments here.

  • I think Roman Candle Baking Co. is the company, so "Roman Candle Baking Co., or simply Roman Candle, was a bakery and pizzeria" doesn't seem right.
  • I would love to see images of the location currently, after the closure.
  • "unofficial holiday" links to 420 (cannabis culture), whilst it is not the target of "in cannabis culture." I suggest changing to "an unofficial holiday in cannabis culture." GeraldWL 15:50, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Gerald Waldo Luis, Thanks. I think we should keep "simply Roman Candle" because the restaurant is more commonly called by the name in sourcing. I plan to take a photograph of two of the exterior next time I'm in the area. I'd like to keep the links for both "420 (cannabis culture)" and "cannabis culture" itself because I believe this provides important context for readers who may not be familiar with cannabis culture. Thanks for your comments, I've nominated a couple more restaurant articles for Good article status, if you're interested in reviewing. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:04, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Another Believer, ah, I got it. My preferences are usually to, if the whole sentence is linkable, I'll link it with the same thing. You got good arguments though. Can you link which articles you nominate? Perhaps I can help. GeraldWL 16:11, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Gerald Waldo Luis, You can find the Agriculture, food and drink Good article nominations here: Wikipedia:Good_article_nominations#Agriculture,_food_and_drink. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:12, 27 November 2020 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Roman_Candle_(Portland,_Oregon)/GA1&oldid=991383954"