Talk:Nefertiti Bust/GA1

GA Review

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.

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 17:34, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

shall be reviewing this page against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Quick fail criteria assessment

The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

No problems with quickfail criteria. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):
I have made a number of minor copy-edits, mostly to avoid repetitive phrasing. Please check.

CT scans: The CT scan in 2006 – led by Alexander Huppertz, the director of the Imaging Science Institute in Berlin, revealed a wrinkled face of Nefertiti carved in the inner core of the bust. I find this somewhat unclear. The phrase carved in the inner core of the bust. suggests that somehow a there is a secret inner sculpture. Could you try to rephrase this for clarity? Y

Yes. There was a secret inner sculptures like wrinkles, which was coated by stucco. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:27, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The 2009 scan provided greater detail than the 1992 one – revealing subtle details just 1–2 mm under the stucco. I thought that the second scan was in 2006 according to an earlier sentence. Or was there a third scan in 2009? If so then that should be stated. Y

Corrected. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:27, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colors: I changed from Colours as the rest of the article uses American English spellings. copper oxide is a disambiguation page - which is meant - Copper(I) oxide or Copper(II) oxide?

I fixed one disambig (the other copper oxide is mentioned above, and several redirects in the wikilinking.

I do not know which link is appropriate. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:29, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, no problem, that can be fixed later. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done; it's fixed now --Sat Ra (talk) 17:20, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):
References check out. I assume GF for print sources. ~~But please add ISBN for books.~~ Y
b (citations to reliable sources):
~~Is ref #3, The Ancient Egyptians for Dummies, a WP:RS?~~ Y

Replaced. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:58, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
c (OR):
It is broad in its scope.
a (major aspects):
I note the comment on the talk page re the art history. There really isn't much of this in the article. Is there more that can be sourced?

Please let me know what in art history specifically is needed, because the same info may be available in elsewhere in the article, without the title "art history". --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When exactly the bust was created is not known (circa year given). Look and materials including colours are covered (the comment was before this part was added).

OK, that is fine. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
b (focused):

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
I note that the image File:Nefertiti 30-01-2006.jpg is essentially the same as that used in the infobox, File:Nofretete Neues Museum.jpg. I don't think it adds anything new to the artcile. Is it really necessary? Y
Removed. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
The article is nearly there. Please respond re my notes above. I note that the nominator is busy for several days, so I will have a look in a week. On hold. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I feel taht the article is now worthy of GA status, although of course there is always more to be done. Passing as GA> Jezhotwells (talk) 19:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments

The lead is really jumping around. Try to move "The bust has become..." out from between historical info.

Done. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As Jez noted, some of the images are reundant, especially those two.

Done. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is coup in italics?

Done. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is mislead in quotation marks? That is what Borchardt claimed.

The document reveals there may have been a deliberate attempt to mislead. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That still doesn't make sense.

Why is secure shelters in quotation marks? They are secure shelters.

Done --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Berlin’s Neues Museum, Museum Island" makes no sense. It should be "on Museum Island"

Done --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Combine the sentences "In 1956..." and "There is was..."

Done --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(German Democratic Republic) is unnecessary

Official name. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still unnecessary. We don't have to add Federal Republic of Germany when refering to the West or current country. A link to East Germany is sufficient.

"Nefertiti to Museum Island, East Berlin," -> "Nefertiti to Museum Island in East Berlin,"

Done --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why does "launched by cultural association, CulturCooperation, based in Hamburg, Germany." have a comme after association?

Done --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"...Neues Museum – her old home, the appropriateness..." should have either double dashes or double commas.
Johann Georg is a dab.

No article in dab. Seems to be relevant. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If none of the links in the dab is the right one, then delink it or pipe to an appropriate redlink.

fixed as well; according to this German article (a portrait) it's Prince Johann Georg of Saxony. Under: Ein Perspektivwechsel it is said: ‘... so wohnte er 1912 der Bergung der Büste der Nofretete bei ...’ (thus he took part at the excavation of the bust of Nefertiti). --Sat Ra (talk) 09:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can remove the non-notable redlinks

Done --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is queen in quotation marks?? That is what they personified her as.

Done --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Same about double dash/comma in sentence "By the 1970s,..."

Overall it is a very informative and referenced article! Reywas92 ^Talk 00:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How is it almost intact? Reywas92^Talk 22:10, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the disambiguations of copper oxide, asked Sat Ra, who added the colours para. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:23, 14 December 2009 (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.