Jump to content

Talk:Two Roosters Ice Cream

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

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 13:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Johnson524 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 13 past nominations.

Johnson524 15:19, 24 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Looks good. Nice work. @Johnson524: I wonder though whether the section titled "Criticism and awards" is appropriate since everything mentioned there seems to be positive. Not someone required to be changed for this to be approved, though. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:48, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done @BeanieFan11: I appreciate the feedback and have updated the page, cheers! Johnson524 11:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Two Roosters Ice Cream/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

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) TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 12:32, 21 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.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
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.
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).
2c. it contains no original research.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
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.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
7. Overall assessment.