Jump to content
 







Main menu
   


Navigation  



Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate
 




Contribute  



Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
 








Search  

































Create account

Log in
 









Create account
 Log in
 




Pages for logged out editors learn more  



Contributions
Talk
 



















Contents

   



(Top)
 


1 Notes  
1 comment  




2 GA Review  
24 comments  


2.1  Criteria  





2.2  Review  



2.2.1  Result  





2.2.2  Discussion  







2.3  Additional notes  







3 Continental US vs mainland US  
7 comments  




4 DYK nomination  
1 comment  













Talk:Leonard's Bakery




Page contents not supported in other languages.  









Article
Talk
 

















Read
Edit
Add topic
View history
 








Tools
   


Actions  



Read
Edit
Add topic
View history
 




General  



What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Get shortened URL
Download QR code
 




Print/export  



Download as PDF
Printable version
 
















Appearance
   

 






From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 


Notes[edit]

Unused sources

czar  22:12, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Leonard's Bakery/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Viriditas (talk · contribs) 00:46, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Criteria[edit]

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Agood article is—

  1. Well-written:
  2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  3. Verifiable with no original research:
  4. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) 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);[2] and
    (c) it contains no original research.
  5. Broad in its coverage:
  6. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  7. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  8. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  9. [4]
  10. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  11. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]

Review[edit]

  1. Well-written:
  2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) Lead: word repetition. See discussion section below. Fixed by nom.
    Background and history: wording, narrative structure and order of importance. See discussion section below. Fixed by nom.
    Background and history: WP:RECENTISM. Fixed
    WP:PROSELINE. See closing comments.
    Pass Pass
    (b) (MoS) Lead: links don't go to logical places or are nonexistent. For example, Portuguese goes to Portuguese cuisine instead of Culture of Portugal; Portuguese immigrants isn't pipe linked to Portuguese immigration to Hawaii; pão doce goes to Portuguese cuisine rather than Portuguese sweet bread. While good arguments could be made for either/or, there needs to be less duplication, more consistency, and logical linking. See also MOS:INTRO and MOS:CONTEXTLINK. Fixed by nom.
    ✓ done czar  22:31, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Pass Pass
  3. Verifiable with no original research:
  4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) OK. Pass Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) Oahu County, Continental United States. See discussion below for details. Fixed by nom. Pass Pass
    (c) (original research) No OR found. Pass Pass
  5. Broad in its coverage:
  6. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) OK. Pass Pass
    (b) (focused) Link to recipe for malasadas. See discussion below for details. Fixed by nom. Pass Pass
  7. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  8. Notes Result
    No neutrality problems. Pass Pass
  9. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  10. Notes Result
    Stable, no edit wars or disputes. Pass Pass
  11. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  12. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) OK. Pass Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) Infobox lacks image_caption parameter, which is perfectly acceptable. Just making a note of it as the caption in this particular infobox is optional per the guidelines. Pass Pass

Result[edit]

Result Notes
Pass Pass Awaiting minor changes to third paragraph in "Background and history" section due to WP:RECENTISM language from 2009.[1] Viriditas (talk) 21:52, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Above changes complete. I made a minor copyedit.[2] The article looks good. Future efforts to improve the prose should focus on eliminating the WP:PROSELINE (As of 2011, In 2012, As of 2009, As of 2015). Instead of focusing on dates, focus on ideas, using the topical narrative structure (for example family ownership, types of food, cultural influence) to group the content. Also, try to paraphrase more and quote less. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 08:23, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

@Czar: Viriditas (talk) 03:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox
Lead, Background and history
Thanks for the heads up. Fixed this and the others. czar  03:22, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Background and history
✓ done czar  23:53, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Another way of looking at it is that the bakery is primarily known for malasadas even before its secondary description as a "plain Jane bakery", so its malasada business is described in detail (its origins, its variations, its promotional items) before mentioning that the bakery also does other/secondary/"plain Jane bakery" stuff. That's the logic. While I appreciate the detailed prose review, I don't think this is going to trip the reader up, though I added some helper words anyway. Everything else should be resolved, if you'll take a look czar  08:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point about giving the malasadas a certain primacy over the other subtopics. That's an interesting approach and I think the helper words actually did the job. Good work. Viriditas (talk) 20:55, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
External links

Additional notes[edit]

  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
  • ^ Either parenthetical referencesorfootnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
  • ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  • ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
  • ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  • ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
  • Continental US vs mainland US[edit]

    This isn't really a big deal, but a change suggested by the GAR was to change from the wording "continental United States" to "mainland United States". This seems stilted to me. As a native English speaker, I don't think I have ever heard this phrase. Maybe the phrase is common in Hawaii, but this Wikipedia is not written in Hawaiian English and should reflect the more widely used phrasing (data: 6,990,000 vs 158,000 ghits). Seems to me in fact they'd be likely to use another phrase in Hawaii anyway. In my experience Hawaiians colloquially say "off-island" like Alaskans say "in the States". — Brianhe (talk) 18:22, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I strongly disagree. There's nothing "stilted" about it. I've been in Hawaii for only 14 years, and they certainly don't say "off-island" as much as they do Mainland. Please read that article to see why there's a problem with using "continental". Accordingly, "The word "mainland" occurs numerous times in Hawaiian law, and apparently refers to any part of the United States outside of Hawaii." This is an article about a bakery in Hawaii, not a bakery in New York. When Hawaii establishments (and our best food sources about Hawaii food) refer to the rest of the country, they use the term "mainland" and our article should reflect that. You are assuming that the term "continental" is the only correct and appropriate term, and that assumption is manifestly false. Viriditas (talk) 21:59, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think it's a big deal either way, but it's easy enough to change a word to make someone happy. I'll add, though, that WP is not a reliable source in itself. The two WP articles used to show how Hawaiians use the phrase are unreferenced in their illuminative parts, which should be deleted from their articles as original research unless supported by a reliable, secondary source. czar  14:20, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not original research nor is it how the term is used. I suggest you take a look-see at Google Books, Google Scholar and any scholarly search index of your liking. The term "mainland" United States is the predominant term. Original research refers to something that can't be sourced. Viriditas (talk) 18:17, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm referring to

    For various reasons outlined in several different articles, including mainland and Contiguous United States#Hawaii,

    Those articles do not have references in the parts that you mention (otherwise they'll be deleted as original research). I am not interested in disputing the continental vs. mainland issue, just pointing out the parts that need referencing, if you're able and willing. – czar 19:04, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, just because something is not explicitly cited does not mean it is original research. Which of these facts are you challenging?
    1. Hawaii became the 50th state of the United States on August 21, 1959.
    2. It is the southernmost and so far, the latest state to join the Union.
    3. Not part of any continent, Hawaii is located in the Pacific Ocean, about 2,200 miles (3,500 km) from North America and almost halfway to Asia.
    4. In Hawaii and overseas American territories, for instance, the terms the Mainland or U.S. Mainland are often used to refer to the continental United States.
    5. The word "mainland" occurs numerous times in Hawaiian law, and apparently refers to any part of the United States outside of Hawaii.
    I suspect that you aren't seriously challenging any of them. Viriditas (talk) 04:59, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I've added some refs, however, while the ref I added supports my contention, it also says the following:

    Although the term 'mainland' is still widely used in Hawai'i to refer to the continental United States, many Hawaiian activists and scholars prefer the term "continent" because the "mainland" implies a position of privilege (or at least 'continent centeredness') and hence domination. As one writer stated, 'For me, Hawai'i is the "main land"!' However, in this article, I use 'mainland' (rather than 'continent') because outside of Hawai'i, readers sometimes misinterpret "the continent" as meaning Europe'."[4]

    I don't agree with this author, but it is at least one good reason to change it back to "continental United States", which I am doing now. Viriditas (talk) 06:16, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    DYK nomination[edit]

    {{Did you know nominations/Leonard's Bakery}} czar  14:20, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Leonard%27s_Bakery&oldid=1228327861"

    Categories: 
    Wikipedia good articles
    Agriculture, food and drink good articles
    GA-Class company articles
    Low-importance company articles
    WikiProject Companies articles
    GA-Class Food and drink articles
    Low-importance Food and drink articles
    GA-Class Foodservice articles
    Low-importance Foodservice articles
    Foodservice Taskforce articles
    WikiProject Food and drink articles
    GA-Class Hawaii articles
    Low-importance Hawaii articles
    WikiProject Hawaii articles
    Wikipedia Did you know articles
     



    This page was last edited on 10 June 2024, at 17:00 (UTC).

    Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.



    Privacy policy

    About Wikipedia

    Disclaimers

    Contact Wikipedia

    Code of Conduct

    Developers

    Statistics

    Cookie statement

    Mobile view



    Wikimedia Foundation
    Powered by MediaWiki