Talk:Salade niçoise/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: DarjeelingTea (talk · contribs) 19:10, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This fabulous article is ready to be promoted to GA status. DarjeelingTea (talk) 20:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Overall this is a very good article that was easy to review. There are a few minor, suggested edits, which are listed below.

Well-written

In the lede, I believe the sentence should read For decades there has been significant disagreement ... instead of having "for decades" following.

Done Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:02, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:LEADLENGTH the lede should be 2-3 paragraphs.

Done Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:09, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This sentence - The group, which certifies restaurants in Nice, sticks with Medicin's standards, rejecting commonly included ingredients such as green beans and potatoes, as well as innovations such as sweetcorn, mayonnaise, shallots and lemon. - though correct, is functionally complex. Is it possible to split it into two sentences?

Done Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:12, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Could this sentence - Her version was called "a massacre of the recipe" and a "sacrilege", and a violation of the "ancestral traditions" of the salad. - use a comma in place of the first "and"?

Done Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:14, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Could we specify in this sentence - She was warned that it is "dangerous to innovate". - who warned her (e.g. was it a comment on Facebook, Mathilde Frénois, the Ministère de la culture, etc.)?

Done I have attributed the report to Mathilde Frénois, a well-known French journalist who often writes for the Paris newspaper Libération. The comments (or insults) she quoted were made on Facebook in response to the recipe that Hélène Darroze posted. Frénois mentions two people by surname, "Marcus" and "Franck" but does not identify them further. I believe that it is better to cite the secondary journalistic coverage of the incident rather than Facebook itself. The cited article includes a link to Hélène Darroze's Facebook page if anyone is interested in reading the full exchange in French.Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:52, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The references list is very long, could it be split into two or three columns (e.g. with {{Reflist|2}})?

Done

Verifiable / No original research

There's no evidence of WP:OR
The article is well-sourced to RS with at least one source in each paragraph that can verifiably support the paragraph's contents.

Broad in coverage

The article is short, however, that's to be expected given the subject matter (a 125 year-old recipe). It explores the subject in adequate detail without focusing on nuances. (If anything, the list of chefs who have published versions of the recipe - beginning with Nigella Lawson - seems to be a little bit too much detail, but I'll leave that to the editorial judgment of the nominator.)
A cursory search I conducted for additional, major themes, failed to find anything that wasn't included.

NPOV

The article, not surprisingly given the subject, is NPOV.

Stable

Outstanding discussions / disagreements on talk page: none; last substantive discussion was in February 2015 and was a consensus page move
Edit history: All substantial edits in the last month have been by the nominator. No signs of edit warring.

Images

There are sufficient images of high quality in this article to illustrate the subject.
Infobox image is CC licensed as "own work."
Second image, by nominator, is CC licensed as "own work."
Third image is CC licensed as "own work."

DarjeelingTea (talk) 19:34, 27 December 2016 (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.