Talk:Titanium/GA1

GA review

Passed. PeriodicEditor (talk) 05:28, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nominator: Reconrabbit (talk · contribs) 16:26, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: PeriodicEditor (talk · contribs) 19:59, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Large amounts of text are just copy and pasted from https://www.trysigma.com/cnc-machining/titanium-alloy-parts-processing-factory.html. Before renominating, this issue needs to be addressed

Hi @PeriodicEditor: I am completely certain that this article is a victim of WP:BACKWARDSCOPY - that is, that the website(s) that contain large portions of this article have copied it from us and did not provide attribution. I believe this because the component parts of the copied text largely existed from the point when the article was promoted to "featured article" in 2007: note primary fabrication, whereby an ingot is converted into general mill products such as billet, bar, plate, sheet, strip and tube. The Trysigma page was likely copied over some time after 2018 when our article came into a form similar to the current one. -- Recon rabbit 20:16, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also https://pse-info.de/en/element/Ti which copies Wikipedia and gives the wrong creative commons license and https://www.xuboti.com/material-titanium-alloy/ which copies some paragraphs for its Q&A, including the very first one. If you want to close this review: try using User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/GANReviewTool. -- Recon rabbit 20:23, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know, I will re-review it, I thought it had copyvio so instant failed it. PeriodicEditor (talk) 04:51, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA Criteria review

1. Well written -
2. Verifiable - Well sourced and no evident original research. No copying other than ones caused by WP:BACKWARDSCOPY
3. Broad in its coverage - Covers all major properties and uses for titanium
4.Neutrality - No bias
5.Stable - No edit warring
6.Illustrated - Well illustrated and has good captions. All media is public domain

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.

All images are open licensed, bu not all are "public domain". Some are CC for example. DMacks (talk) 07:35, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I just got confused and this is my first GA review, so thanks for the feedback. Does it make a difference for the review, it being CC? PeriodicEditor (talk) 07:38, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It does not make a difference in this sort of situation. WP:GACR6 does not say anything about what licenses are/aren't allowed. DMacks (talk) 07:43, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you take a look at some of the sources and confirm that they support the text? This is a requirement in step 3 of the GA instructions. -- Recon rabbit 14:54, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have, did you find any that didn’t PeriodicEditor (talk) 17:01, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can note which parts you checked. See for example Talk:Radium/GA4 under "Sources spot check". -- Recon rabbit 17:06, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did check sources, I just didn't note it down. Thanks for telling me PeriodicEditor (talk) 17:08, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]