Talk:Two Roosters Ice Cream/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Nominator: Johnson524 (talk · contribs) 13:28, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: TrademarkedTWOrantula (talk · contribs) 12:32, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet! (gonna claim this review before others do, hehe) TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 12:32, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for picking up this review! I'll try to respond to your feedback as soon as possible, but with college orientation this week for me, there might be some delay 😅 Cheers! Johnson524 19:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's alright! Congrats on making it to college. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 19:37, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnson524: Finished. Gonna put the article on hold. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 17:58, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	All grammar and typos have been corrected. Prose has been cleaned up.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead section is of adequate length. Layout is correct per MOS:LAYOUT. Article is not overrun with words from the WTW list. Fiction and list incorporation policies do not apply.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	A reference section is provided.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Article mostly sources from local television stations and The News & Observer.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Spotchecking proves there is no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	According to Earwig, the top result is at a 9.1% similarity! Well done!
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	The reception section contains little information and is referenced with local sources.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Article stays on-topic. It does not list every ice cream flavor they have had (which would be a violation of WP:INDISCRIMINATE).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article is neutral; it does not try to promote or criticize the restaurant itself.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article is stable. No edit wars have occurred as of this review.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Logo has valid fair use rationale. Physical location and ice cream photos are published under a CC0 1.0 license.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Logo photo shows what the logo looks like. Physical location photo shows what the building looks like. Ice cream sample photo shows what they serve.
	7. Overall assessment.

Quickfail?[edit]

Y Spot no cleanup banners or citation needed tags.
Y Article is stable.
Y Article is free of any copyright violations, according to Earwig.
Y No previous mistakes to note.
Y Nothing too problematic.

Initial comments[edit]

The reception article looks a little sparse. Is that all there can be found?
Is the quote box needed?
Can't really see the middle flavor, coffee bourbon, well enough (to me, it looks like vanilla)
Source 10 (PNC Arena primary source) isn't needed (secondary source could just as easily verify that there is a Two Roosters in the arena)
How is source 4 (Poole College of Management) reliable?

Lead[edit]

"located around" -> "in"?
"began operations" -> "was founded"?
Cut "unique" in "unique flavors" (sounds promotional)
Would not recommend quoting "grilled cheese" and "pizza" (I would consider it scare-quoting)
gained ~~enough~~ public support
Link brick and mortar
"a further four location" -> "two new locations" (according to their official website)
Is the Cary location open yet?
Could add a one-sentence summary of the ice cream parlor's menu and collaborations.
Quote "best local ice cream" instead of italicizing it

History[edit]

Founding[edit]

"The founder of the parlor" -> "Founder"
was inspired by his childhood to make the business someday when he and other neighborhood kids churned and created ice cream at his grandmother's house. -> "...was inspired to start an ice cream parlor from his childhood experience churning ice cream with his neighbors at his grandmother's house."
On both sides of his grandmother's doorway hung black wooden roosters, which later inspired the name of the parlor. -> "Both sides of his grandmother's doorway had black wooden roosters, which inspired the parlor's name."
"Here, he" -> "At college, he"
Plummer later said in a 2021 Poole College interview his time working as an accountant helped him to feel confident in starting his own business. -> "In a 2021 Poole College interview, Plummer stated that working as an accountant helped him feel confident starting his own business."
"spread awareness and bring in sales" -> "promote the business"
Not sure how it's relevant to state the spot where the Two Roosters truck parks the most often
Cut "unique" in "unique flavors" (promotional)
Don't scare-quote "grilled cheese" or "pizza"
Just gonna copyedit stuff myself

Growth and expansion[edit]

First paragraph is quite confusing. If the reader were to read this without dates, they would be confused as to which branch was founded after the other.
In late 2023 or early 2024 - Which is it?

Menu and collaborations[edit]

"between the seasons" -> "seasonally"
new ice cream flavors
"picked out" -> "chosen"
or ~~decided~~ in guest collaborations.
and Plummer's favorite - Trivia; not really that important to mention
Cut "according to a 2024 The News & Observer article" as the reader could easily pull up the reference and view its bibliographic information
One annually recurring collaboration and Plummer's favorite, according to a 2024 The News & Observer article, is named "kid chef", where local kids submit ice cream flavors and the six most inventive are picked to make up the monthly series. -> An annually recurring collaboration is the "kid chef" contest, where children submit ice cream flavors, with the top six making up the next monthly series.
These specialty flavors - From the "kid chef" contest?
Some flavors have dairy-free options. - Would recommend moving this sentence earlier in the paragraph.
"Flavors such as" -> "Flavors with" (article is talking about ingredients, but I may be wrong here)
I'm kind of against quoting the ice cream flavor names
"run promotions" -> "sponsored"?
Technically the collaborations are part of the menu. Couldn't we just call this section "menu" instead?

Reception[edit]

"has also won first in" -> "won"
USA Today 10Best - Is it "10 Best" or "10Best"?
Since this is a short section, there isn't really that much to note. However, I do feel as though this section could be a tad longer, especially for an ice cream parlor that is considered the "best in the nation".
What did they rank in the 2019 10 Best Readers' Choice Awards?

Spotchecking[edit]

Gonna check seven sources.
#6: Y Y N (doesn't mention what type of bourbon, it just says "bourbon") Y
#7: Y
#11: Y
#13: N (only mentions the Cracker Jacks-flavored ice cream)
#15: Y
#16: Y
#19: N Can't seem to access the results.