Talk:Mills Novelty Company

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mills Novelty Company was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Reviewed version: September 5, 2007

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

Chicago Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles related to Chicago. B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. This article is part of WikiProject Illinois, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. Business and economics Portal This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject. B rated as B-Class on the assessment scale ??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

[edit] GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

5. It is stable.

   

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

   a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

7. Overall:

   a Pass/Fail:

All right here is my review. The article needs some work, but I think it can make it. First of all the history section contains alot of WP:PROSELINE. I would like it if that would go. Second, you need some more sources especially in the "Mills Violano-Virtuoso" section. The trivia section has to be incorporated and not on its own. You might want to include a little more info as well. I no it is a lot, but this is what needs to be done. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (tαlk) 23:21, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Upon closer look, you were right to request all the changes. I will not be able to make all of them. However,

the history section contains alot of WP:PROSELINE - I did a little to move the family section out, but thats about it.

you need some more sources especially in the "Mills Violano-Virtuoso" section - You are correct. Someone will get to it, but not me not now.

The trivia section has to be incorporated. Y Done

You might want to include a little more info. - Could help, but again nmnn.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 00:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

NOTICE - I will post this on the WP:CHICOTW discussion board and hope someone wants to take over from here. Please give us our full seven days.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 00:03, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

As agreed I gave you a extra two days from my initial review to make up for the time you did not see the article's review. There is still a lot of proseline, and a fair amount of unsourced info. Unfortunately, I have to fail it. Sorry. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (tαlk) 19:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)