Talk:Black Swan emblems and popular culture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Black Swan emblems and popular culture has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
February 10, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
Flag
Portal
Black Swan emblems and popular culture is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia.

Black Swan emblems and popular culture is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ).
WikiProject Popular Culture This article is within the scope of WikiProject Popular Culture,
a WikiProject which aims to improve all articles related to popular culture.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article is on a subject of High-importance within popular culture articles.

[edit] Another reference

This page is on Black Swans as icons, but I have not seen it used. A neat article with some good angles, image-wise. By the way,

← no mention of the motto ... Cygnis insignis 10:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Ther is now, thanks to User talk:TRS-80 Cygnis insignis 13:44, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

I took this review to clear out the good article backlog in the Miscellaneous Category. Before today I have not considered this topic, making me eligible to review.

When comparing this to GAC1, I find that the article is well written and has no apparent grammar errors. I would recommend rewriting the intro to FA standards. Also 2,3,4,5 have been met.

Images are provided and in sufficent quantity. I would add more if possible.

In all this is a good article. By meeting the criteria, it passes.

Geoff Plourde (talk) 18:27, 11 February 2008 (UTC)