Blowing from a gun 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 so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: December 10, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
Blowing from a gun received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A recent eyewitness report from North Korean defector Hee Yeon Lim indicates that victims executed by anti-aircraft guns were tied to the front of the guns. This might qualify as a 21st century example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.113.122.131 ( talk) 21:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Blowing from guns in Afghanistan in 1930: I never heard of this before, and consider it to be imaginary. Various other cruel methods of execution were used in Afghanistan as late as the reign of Amir Abdur Rahman Khan (1880-1901). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.180.51.210 ( talk) 18:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
To be grammatical, the title needs an indefinite article — blowing from a gun. Richwales ( talk · contribs) 22:35, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
The article needs to say whether the cannon has a ball loaded or if it is a blank gunpowder charge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.5.142.39 ( talk) 22:52, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm not disputing the correctness of the information... but 207 references for an obscure and obsolete method of execution? Holy cow. This article is of undue length, compared to other articles of greater importance. 71.219.204.88 ( talk) 16:32, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: North8000 ( talk · contribs) 15:08, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
I am starting a GA review of this article. North8000 (
talk)
15:08, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to bring up two things which I do NOT consider to be to the point of being problematic as context for a third item. On person on the talk page expressed the opinion that the article was too long. I don't think that it is too long. It probably has more examples and details than a typical article, but I still consider that to be in the range of OK. Second, some might consider it to be a bit heavy on the macabre details, but I think that it is in the range of OK on that as well. But in the light of those two items, IMHO the "blowing up of people and bodies of people" material unrelated to the topic of the article should be omitted. For example, talking about taking the head of an already decapitated person and putting explosives inside of it and igniting them, or of blowing up buildings (using placed explosives) with people in them. What do you think? I could help pare those if you agree. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 18:14, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Regarding footnoting and citing of quotations, there are a various policies and guidelines that relate to this (including to avoid even accidental borderline plagiarism and copyvio) and so it is a pretty strict area Some related to wp:verifiability which says that they must have in line citations. The other relate to clearly identifying quotations as quotations and crediting the source so as to avoid accidental borderline plagiarism / copyvio. In reading this through, I think that this need s to be done in a clearer fashion. In many cases I believe that you gave the source of the quote in a footnote on the previous sentence. Between this location and there not being a statement of the source of the quote, I don't think that the quote is clearly attributed to the source. North8000 ( talk) 12:46, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
I went through some newspaper bases today, and found some additional 20th century reports, from German Kamerun, Marocco and Afghanistan 1904-1913. Since they filled in some cultural/dynastic gaps, I thought fit to include them. Arildnordby ( talk) 17:19, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
The subheader "Africa" looks oddly empty, IMO it would look better with a summary sentence or two of the content which follows.
I'm also finding some of the sentences a tad unencyclopedic in tone. I might tweak them myself rather than bother to list them here. Gatoclass ( talk) 13:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
The article writing does have a feel of having a large amount of examples and detail and less overview / summarization of material. And the section with the quotes shows this more so than others. But, mitigating that issue with respect to a standard for review of the article, this is a mostly historical practice and a specialized topic such as this, the amount of overview type sources could be limited. Next, the quotes do include informative details. Also, this for Good Article, not Featured Article, and so the bar should not be overly high. It is also a very well done and thorough article in the other respects. The end result is that if I had to say "pass" or "non-pass" today, I'd say "pass". But in view of the discussion, I think it agreeable and better to do a few improvements in those areas first. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 15:29, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Well-written
Factually accurate and verifiable
Broad in its coverage
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute
Illustrated, if possible, by images
This article passes as a Wikipedia Good Article. Congratulations! What an immense amount of excellent work and sourcing work. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 01:48, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
(this is "duplicated" here for when the review is no longer transcluded)
Congratulations! This has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article. What a large amount of excellent work! Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 01:55, 10 December 2013 (UTC) Reviewer
I have now completed a slightly less than 70% article reduction,and would very much like comments if the article ought to be reduced further, if its focus should shift somewhat, or some points be expanded. In particular, I call upon editors North8000 and Gatoclass to come with their comments, because I value their previous advice Arildnordby ( talk) 01:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Was this done by Shaka, or was it the British, or was it just fiction in the Shaka Zulu (TV Series) ? 109.151.135.121 ( talk) 04:33, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Blowing from a gun. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:16, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
The article states that "Arguably, the nation most well known to have implemented this type of execution was the British Empire." I understand the point that was being made, but the British Empire was not a "nation" (it was an Empire!) I'm not sure how to fix it. ExpatSalopian ( talk) 21:44, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
"Arguably,the most well known implementer of this type of execution was the British Empire." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:1281:A03A:FC7E:9A93:9F9D:717A ( talk) 03:29, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
The second paragraph has this sentence: "During the latter half of the 17th century, members of the Jat people in Northern India rebelled and raided against the Mughal Empire, … " I can understand "rebelled against" - but "raided against"? Prisoner of Zenda ( talk) 07:18, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Blowing from a gun 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 so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: December 10, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
Blowing from a gun received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A recent eyewitness report from North Korean defector Hee Yeon Lim indicates that victims executed by anti-aircraft guns were tied to the front of the guns. This might qualify as a 21st century example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.113.122.131 ( talk) 21:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Blowing from guns in Afghanistan in 1930: I never heard of this before, and consider it to be imaginary. Various other cruel methods of execution were used in Afghanistan as late as the reign of Amir Abdur Rahman Khan (1880-1901). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.180.51.210 ( talk) 18:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
To be grammatical, the title needs an indefinite article — blowing from a gun. Richwales ( talk · contribs) 22:35, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
The article needs to say whether the cannon has a ball loaded or if it is a blank gunpowder charge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.5.142.39 ( talk) 22:52, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm not disputing the correctness of the information... but 207 references for an obscure and obsolete method of execution? Holy cow. This article is of undue length, compared to other articles of greater importance. 71.219.204.88 ( talk) 16:32, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: North8000 ( talk · contribs) 15:08, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
I am starting a GA review of this article. North8000 (
talk)
15:08, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to bring up two things which I do NOT consider to be to the point of being problematic as context for a third item. On person on the talk page expressed the opinion that the article was too long. I don't think that it is too long. It probably has more examples and details than a typical article, but I still consider that to be in the range of OK. Second, some might consider it to be a bit heavy on the macabre details, but I think that it is in the range of OK on that as well. But in the light of those two items, IMHO the "blowing up of people and bodies of people" material unrelated to the topic of the article should be omitted. For example, talking about taking the head of an already decapitated person and putting explosives inside of it and igniting them, or of blowing up buildings (using placed explosives) with people in them. What do you think? I could help pare those if you agree. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 18:14, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Regarding footnoting and citing of quotations, there are a various policies and guidelines that relate to this (including to avoid even accidental borderline plagiarism and copyvio) and so it is a pretty strict area Some related to wp:verifiability which says that they must have in line citations. The other relate to clearly identifying quotations as quotations and crediting the source so as to avoid accidental borderline plagiarism / copyvio. In reading this through, I think that this need s to be done in a clearer fashion. In many cases I believe that you gave the source of the quote in a footnote on the previous sentence. Between this location and there not being a statement of the source of the quote, I don't think that the quote is clearly attributed to the source. North8000 ( talk) 12:46, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
I went through some newspaper bases today, and found some additional 20th century reports, from German Kamerun, Marocco and Afghanistan 1904-1913. Since they filled in some cultural/dynastic gaps, I thought fit to include them. Arildnordby ( talk) 17:19, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
The subheader "Africa" looks oddly empty, IMO it would look better with a summary sentence or two of the content which follows.
I'm also finding some of the sentences a tad unencyclopedic in tone. I might tweak them myself rather than bother to list them here. Gatoclass ( talk) 13:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
The article writing does have a feel of having a large amount of examples and detail and less overview / summarization of material. And the section with the quotes shows this more so than others. But, mitigating that issue with respect to a standard for review of the article, this is a mostly historical practice and a specialized topic such as this, the amount of overview type sources could be limited. Next, the quotes do include informative details. Also, this for Good Article, not Featured Article, and so the bar should not be overly high. It is also a very well done and thorough article in the other respects. The end result is that if I had to say "pass" or "non-pass" today, I'd say "pass". But in view of the discussion, I think it agreeable and better to do a few improvements in those areas first. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 15:29, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Well-written
Factually accurate and verifiable
Broad in its coverage
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute
Illustrated, if possible, by images
This article passes as a Wikipedia Good Article. Congratulations! What an immense amount of excellent work and sourcing work. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 01:48, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
(this is "duplicated" here for when the review is no longer transcluded)
Congratulations! This has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article. What a large amount of excellent work! Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 01:55, 10 December 2013 (UTC) Reviewer
I have now completed a slightly less than 70% article reduction,and would very much like comments if the article ought to be reduced further, if its focus should shift somewhat, or some points be expanded. In particular, I call upon editors North8000 and Gatoclass to come with their comments, because I value their previous advice Arildnordby ( talk) 01:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Was this done by Shaka, or was it the British, or was it just fiction in the Shaka Zulu (TV Series) ? 109.151.135.121 ( talk) 04:33, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Blowing from a gun. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:16, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
The article states that "Arguably, the nation most well known to have implemented this type of execution was the British Empire." I understand the point that was being made, but the British Empire was not a "nation" (it was an Empire!) I'm not sure how to fix it. ExpatSalopian ( talk) 21:44, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
"Arguably,the most well known implementer of this type of execution was the British Empire." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:1281:A03A:FC7E:9A93:9F9D:717A ( talk) 03:29, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
The second paragraph has this sentence: "During the latter half of the 17th century, members of the Jat people in Northern India rebelled and raided against the Mughal Empire, … " I can understand "rebelled against" - but "raided against"? Prisoner of Zenda ( talk) 07:18, 10 July 2021 (UTC)