# Talk:Milk chocolate

This review is transcluded from Talk:Milk chocolate/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 16:54, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful. 
If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)
I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy. 
Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.


### Immediate Failures
It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
It contains copyright infringements -
It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -


### Links
### Prose
#### Lede
Hi! I don't think we've come into contact before, but this looks like a pretty neat article. Some thoughts:

The lede paragraph is quite small, probably needs some more information on how else it is sold, and probably the bit about where it is most sold would be suitable in the first para. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Very good point. I have moved the information around and added a bit more explanation.
WP:GEOLAND, we don't really need to link to major landmasses, such as the Swiss people. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Done.
in 1875 that the milk chocolate bar became a reality. - just say invent, or it's a bit promo. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
You are right. That is fixed.
It was also advertised as providing health benefits. - expand. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
I have added a bit more, including a recent example.
When you say "including...", I'd give three examples. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Good point. There are a few to choose from too.


#### General
The body goes into detail how the term "milk chocolate" predates what is said in the lede, so maybe mention in lede that it was first used by the Aztecas. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Yes. I have added to reference to Jamaica.
cocoa mass, cocoa butter, condensed milk, dark chocolate, conche are all duplicate links. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Done.
The images need a better caption, rather than just stating what they are Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Really good point. I have added a bit more.
Can we also get some alt text? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Another great point. They now have.
The second "infobox", is more of a nutrition box, which is great, but I don't think it needs an image. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
True. I have moved the picture to further down the text.
Rowntree's Kit Kat - reword to avoid WP:SEAOFBLUE/WP:EASTEREGG. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Good point. That is now fixed.


### GA Review
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


### Review meta comments
I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have a list of nominations for review at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these if you get time. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:54, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the review. That is very thorough.  simongraham (talk) 03:23, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
@Lee Vilenski: Please tell me if there is anything outstanding to be done after your review. simongraham (talk) 20:48, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Promoting: Sorry about the delay, I've been having a bit of a break after the end of the wikicup. This seems fine for GA, thanks for making the changes above.
Thank you, Lee Vilenski, and congratulations on your success in the wikicup! 13:19, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

The article has a dubiously slanted tone towards the health benefit of eating chocolate.  I have little doubt about the claims of milk chocolate being historically advertised as healthy but there are many articles that take an extremely skeptical perspective on the health benefits of chocolate (milk or dark). This is a general statement about the quality of claims that come from diet science. Maneesh (talk) 06:33, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

The article currently contains a subsection called "Hearsay process", which has the following text:
The actual Hershey process is a trade secret, but experts speculate that the milk is partially lipolyzed, producing butyric acid, and then the milk is pasteurized, stabilizing it for use. The resulting milk chocolate has been described by experts as "tangy", "sour", and "acidified".
The text provides in my opinion little value to reader about milk chocolate, or manufacturing of milk chocolate. The text is not well written (no definition) and leaves the reader with more questions than answers. Since this article currently has a "good article" label to it, I am requesting comments before deletion. 2001:2020:343:B839:FDBD:BCB1:DB1A:C50C (talk) 00:10, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

I think it's important to include, because it answers a frequently asked question about Hershey's chocolate and why it has a tangier taste than other manufacturers, especially among European consumers. oknazevad (talk) 01:35, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Agreed. It's properly sourced information and should remain. Barry Wom (talk) 10:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)