Baconnaise[edit]

This article contains a link to a product sold at one, online store, and as such falls into the category of WP:SPAM. --OliverTwisted 07:37, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw the concern, as additional references and information were added to the article. CSD withdrawn. Cheers. --OliverTwisted 08:37, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Newyorkadam (talk · contribs) 07:01, 17 January 2014 (UTC) I will review this :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 07:01, 17 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

Quick-glance comments:

Comments:

 Done

 Done

 Done

 Done

 Done

Resolved, it was the official response of the company. I fixed it to J&D foods official name and linked it. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done

 Done

Resolved. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done

 Done

 Done

 Done

If it is linked within the article it should not be in the "See also". See also is supposed to be for related, but undiscussed aspects of am article. I also added links for Bacon Salt. So I think this is okay. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed all those issues. How's it look now? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I dug up more information on the release and got the list of ingredients and expanded a bit more on the Baconnaise Lite matter, but the product is no longer sold so I stated that. Should be even better now. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:49, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Right now I'm working with Chris on IRC. -Newyorkadam (talk) 02:24, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]
Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. After fixes, yes! :)
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. Contains 17 references.
2b. 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). Contains many in-line citations!
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. I don't see any bias.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Only recent edits (except for one) are from ChrisGualtieri, the Good Article nominator.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. One image in the infobox of a bottle of Baconnaise. Image is from Flickr and released under the Attribution 2.0 Generic license which is allowed on Wikipedia, However, the image is blurry, low-resolution, and small. Try to find another image please :)
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Image is definitely relevant to the topic, it's a photo of a bottle of Baconnaise. Image doesn't have a caption; it doesn't need one, but it certainly can't hurt.
7. Overall assessment. Nice job Chris :)

Final decision comment: Passed! Nice work Chris :) Thanks for putting up with my strict reviewing :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 02:59, 18 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Baconnaise. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:09, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]