Jump to content

Talk:Borromean rings/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Tayi Arajakate (talk · contribs) 16:30, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

[edit]
  1. Comprehension: No major issues with comprehension.
  2. Pass Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) Some minor issues might exist. See comments below. (Resolved) Pass Pass
    (b) (MoS) No manual of style issues were found. Pass Pass
  3. Verifiability: The article appears to meet the requirement for verifiability.
  4. Pass Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) The article has inline citations and a list of references. Pass Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) References used in the article are from reliable sources Pass Pass
    (c) (original research) No original research found. Pass Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) No copyright issues found; earwig's brings up a few false positives. Pass Pass
  5. Comprehensiveness: The article is comprehensive.
  6. Pass Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) The article covers all major aspects, one elaboration may be possible. See comments below. (Resolved) Pass Pass
    (b) (focused) The article is on topic without any unnecessary deviations. Pass Pass
  7. Neutrality: The article is neutral.
  8. Pass Pass
    Notes Result
    No issues with neutrality found. Pass Pass
  9. Stability: The article is stable.
  10. Pass Pass
    Notes Result
    No major changes or ongoing disputes. Pass Pass
  11. Illustration: The article is well illustrated.
  12. Pass Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) All images are free to use and tagged with their appropriate copyright statuses. Pass Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) Image use is proper and with suitable captions. Pass Pass

Comments

[edit]
@Tayi Arajakate: Hello? It's been over a week since you promised a review. Any progress? —David Eppstein (talk) 20:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
David Eppstein, sorry about that. I'll complete it within the next 24 hours. Tayi Arajakate Talk 06:55, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
David Eppstein, I've completed the review. The article is pretty much a good article, there are couple or so issues so I'm putting it on hold for them to be addressed or clarified. Tayi Arajakate Talk 02:04, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article appears better now, congratulations on improving another article to the status of a good article. Tayi Arajakate Talk 07:16, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]


  • The PDF linked in ref 24 doesn't seem to be reachable. The sentence it is cited for, "[a]nother argument for the impossibility of circular realizations, by Helge Tverberg, uses inversive geometry", could perhaps be elaborated a bit as well?
  • The sentence, "[i]n knot theory, the ropelength of a knot or link measures the minimum length of a curve realizing the knot that can be thickened to a tube of radius one around the curve without intersecting itself" is a bit awkward to read. It could be split into two sentences.
  • In the line, "making the Borromean rings one of at most 21 links that correspond to uniform honeycombs in this way", doesn't make more sense to mention that it is one of at least 19 links?
  • Stylistic suggestion; all the images are on the right, some of them could be moved left. The images are also a bit cluttered, some of them can be removed, resized or their captions modified to prevent them from crossing sections. For instance, the diagram of the non-Borromean three triangle link and the one with the Siefert surface, don't particularly seem to add much. The caption "[r]ealization with smallest known ropelength, the logo of the International Mathematical Union" could omit the first part being already mentioned in the section.

Tayi Arajakate Talk 01:47, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I shortened the IMU logo caption. Putting images on the left tends to run into issues with WP:SANDWICH: with images on both left and right, on narrow screens, the
article
text
can be
squeezed into very narrow columns. Keeping everything right works better for a layout that is flexible over varied window sizes (you can try resizing your browser window to see this effect on articles with left images). The non-Borromean three triangle link is included because there are incorrect claims in the literature that it is Borromean and without being able to see what the link is, it is hard to understand whether to believe those claims. The Seifert surface is included to connect to the article text on the Martin Gardner column, which doesn't otherwise explain what a Seifert surface is. If we're going to be removing images, I think the most disposable one is the Discordian logo, so I dropped that one, and simplified some other captions. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:42, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]