Talk:La Bonita/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: Gerald Waldo Luis (talk · contribs) 16:33, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

If you're celebrating, Merry Christmas AB (hope that's not weird)! I myself am about to with my family, so have some time for this GA review. GeraldWL 16:33, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:50, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Lead and infobox

• "La Bonita: Food for the People"-- Is this the actual complete name, and with colons? If so, I'd like to have it mentioned in the Description section and cited. For me, 'food for the people' sounds like a slogan than a complete name, judging from the logo.
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:55, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

  The restaurant's website, Google Maps, and some sources actually use "Food for the People" as part of the name. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:32, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

• "in Portland, Oregon"-- think you should add ", the United States" per your other resto GAs. Also applies to Description paragraph 1, sentence 1.
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:55, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
• "of the nation's best burritos"-- I think it should be "country". Oxford says that country is a specific kind of nation with a governing institution. Also applies to Reception paragraph 1, penultimate sentence.
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:55, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
• Infobox looks good (except for caption, see Others point 1)
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:57, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Description - history

• "operates via fast counter service"-- as in a fast food restaurant? If so then it must be linked, and it must also be categorized as such at the lead, and infobox if appropriate.
  • To me, counter service does not necessarily mean fast food. I would only add "fast food" descriptors if sources specifically described the restaurant as such. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:04, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
• "also offered delivery service, as of May 2020"-- weird comma, at least for me.
  • There's often a comma before "as of XXX", and this is how I use the phrase in all of my GAs. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:10, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
• Overall looks fine. These two sections seems relatively short for a stereotypical GA (this entire article having 733 words), but hey-- 2005 Azores subtropical storm has 669 words and is FA, so I'll give it a pass. Although an expansion on the History would be great, such as the opening date of the first resto-- but for now it's fine.
  • Agreed, but so far I've struggled to find when the original restaurant opened. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:04, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

    Another Believer, I see in the reception section that the restaurant has opened as early as 2008, so I guess it can be noted? Better than nothing IMHO, although I understand if it's not appropriate. GeraldWL 17:13, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

    I've seen sourcing about the restaurant dating back to 2001, but they don't say what year the restaurant opened. I'd rather not use a vague statement like "as early as" or similar until more details can be confirmed. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:25, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Reception

• After "writing", there's either a comma or colon, must be consistent.
  • Commas. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:10, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
• "Mom-and-Pop" --> "[m]om-and-[p]op", since the word is in low caps.
  • I don't see harm in keeping the quote as published, especially since "[m]om-and-[p]op" looks awkward. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:10, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

    Yyyeahh I can see that now. Just a little thing that momentarily bothered my autism, but looking back the square brackets bothered me more. GeraldWL 17:15, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

    OK thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:27, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

• I think the blockquote can easily be paraphrased: "She wrote that despite its prices being in the relatively cheap, $3-8 range, the quality of the menu is still good, and praised the extensive vegetarian burrito menu for being vegan-friendly, thus agreeing with its slogan "Food for the people"."
• "white faces"-- link white people.
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:05, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
• "brown"-- link Brown (racial classification).
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:05, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
• Link taqueria.
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:01, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
• "This little taqueria" --> "[It]", since it's repetitive.
  • I actually think "little taqueria" is helpful and not harmful. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:28, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
• Link al pastor.
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:01, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Others

• Image caption 1 says "in 2021", while image caption 1 says "2019" following a comma. To be consistent, I suggest using brackets instead; so "(pictured 2021)" and "(pictured 2019)".
  •  Done ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:58, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
• Citations are reliable and look good, although I'd note that no. 1 (Oregonian) has ISSN whilst other Oregonian citations don't have them. Eater Portland and Thrillist citations following no. 3 has no publisher. Link Avalon Publishing.
  • I've linked Avalon Publishing, but publishers should only be added to citations the first time. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:00, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

    Not necessarily "should"-- it's a preferential thing-- but I respect the preference, reason why I "noted" instead of instructed :) GeraldWL 17:17, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

    Ah!, you're right per MOS:REPEATLINK, but I usually don't see citations repeating publishers. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:27, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

    Another Believer, you'll see a lot in my works-- Ave Maryam, Plandemic, and To Fly! to name a few. Oh and also, I am currently having a BBQ with family so I won't be able to edit for a few hours but I will make final checks soon and make this GA. GeraldWL 17:41, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

• Exlinks look fine.
  • Like ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:00, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

• Apologies for the 3 hour wait! I've done additional checks and added maintenance templates, but overall I think this looks like the fine GA!  Passed GeraldWL 20:24, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

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.