This review is transcluded from Talk:Just Stop Oil Sunflowers protest/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Launchballer (talk · contribs) 12:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: GhostRiver (talk · contribs) 21:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm GhostRiver. I'll be reviewing this article against the good article criteria. By doing so, I am earning points for the WikiCup and the January 2025 GAN Backlog Drive. Although a quid pro quo review is not necessary, it is appreciated. You can see what open good article nominations I have here.

I will go through the article section by section checking it against the criteria. Once I have finished my review, I will place the article on hold, giving you seven days to respond. If you need more time, just reach out! While I'll always put the article on hold once it's ready for you to look at, you may start making changes before I complete my review. — GhostRiver 21:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 note about pronouns should probably be in an endnote, like it is on Plummer's page

Moved to the first occasion where either of them are described in singular.

• protests including protestors vary word choice

Reworded.

• one of seven paintings of Sunflowers by Vincent van Gogh → one of Vincent van Gogh's seven Sunflowers paintings

Reworded.

• Comma after the above phrase

Added.

• In the wake of declining media coverage on climate change generally? Just Stop Oil specifically? Secret third thing?

Just Stop Oil.

• Any reason why they didn't go after the Warhol?

From Frieze (ref #5): "We had originally planned to throw soup at Andy Warhol purely for how meta it would have been, but, as Phoebe said, it’s such a beautiful, iconic piece of work. And Van Gogh himself was a penniless artist. He lived and died in debt. If he’d been alive today under this government, he would have been one of those people who, this winter, would be forced to choose between eating or heating his home." I have updated the article.

• WL Heinz

The lede used to mention it, but that link was removed. I've added a link in body.

• Word choice of "armed" here feels editorializing

Removed word.

• Nerves meant that Plummer went off-script → A nervous Plummer deviated from their plan

Reworded.

• WL mangrove

Added.

• some were assuaged who is "some"?

Complainants.

• WL Westminster Magistrates' Court - there is no Westminster Crown Court, despite what the article says. Only the magistrates.

Fixed.

• sparking further disgusted headlines tone

Reworded.

• Can shorten the WL to R v Hallam to just "sentenced Hallam"

Shortened.

• prompting Hehir to warn the pair to expect jail time I don't think this is necessary, given the sentencing details are in the next para

I would respectfully disagree. So far as I can make out, the open letter was published because of Hehir's threat.

• "a hundred" → "one hundred"

Changed.

• held a vigil outside outside where?

The court. Updated the article.

• In spite of both of these needs a noun here before the comma. Also, "despite" instead of "in spite of". Different meaning, different connotations.

Changed clause to "Despite both the open letter and the vigil".

• Not sure "expressed milk" is a commonly known term, use and WL the more common breast milk

Changed.

• Comma after "and paedophiles", as that's a new thought

Added.

• Change % symbol to "per cent" per MOS:PERCENT

Always thought it was "percent", so I've learned something.

• Last sentence feels awkward. It's a statement of fact presented in the same paragraph as several opinions, and without context, reads as a tug-at-the-heartstrings (this poor person, spending Christmas in prison!)

Moved to previous paragraph (and added a qualifier).

• Several references need author names

All now have.

• Spot checks turned up fine
• Some op-eds used, but used with intent. Otherwise reliable sourcing

• No stability concerns, nominator has been involved with article
• One public domain image, directly relevant to the article
• Copyvio score looks good, the major thing it picked up was a direct quote
• I don't like having two subheads with "and aftermath". Vary wording.

Changed to "Protest and bail" and "Trial and reactions". I believe I've addressed all your concerns.--Launchballer 00:27, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Made a couple tweaks to the lede myself, as I realize I forgot that section (it's always the last section I review and sometimes it slips my mind). Passing now. — GhostRiver 17:44, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]