Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
There are some faults in the article, which I found out. Firstly there are many places where there are only general references only, but no inline citations. There is also original research in the infobox for Minister of State for Finance and Economics Affairs there are dates and predecessor and successor which are not sourced, which also applies to birth date and religion. There are many dead links which have made difficult to verifu facts stated in the article. Also the article has no information post 2012/13 and says nothing about the end of tenure as foreign minister.
RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (
talk)
08:44, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Although Royrobdeb has not edited on Wikipedia for over four months, this individual reassessment should continue because the article clearly needs significant work to meet the GA criteria. I have checked, and the only real work since this was opened 15 months ago has been to the lead section.
There are a number of issues beyond those raised by Royroydeb. Unfortunately, one of them is the revised lead section, which is now four paragraphs, longer than an article of just under 10,000 prose characters should be (the recommended length is one to two paragraphs, and I'd certainly expect two). Also, there is much information in the lead that does not appear in the article proper, including the end of the third paragraph and the entire final paragraph. This all needs to be added to the body, preferably with additional details, while some may not be needed here in the lead.
Other issues include:
That's it for the moment. I plan to allow the standard seven days for these issues to be addressed, though if work is in progress, since there is a lot to do, I will naturally extend the time. BlueMoonset ( talk) 17:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
jcc, again there's great improvement, and I thought to do a final edit this evening to get the article to the point that I could happily sign off on it. Unfortunately, I've found some instances of close paraphrasing verging on copyvio while doing so, and after taking care of several instances, I hit my limit. Some past contributors have, unfortunately, thought nothing of copying in a sentence or two from an article—not even attempting to paraphrase, and in at least one instance, combining separate bits into a single quote and not distinguishing which were Khar's words and which the publication's author's. Source 45 (from tribune.com.pk/story/333452) is a case in point: the opening sentence of the source is copied virtually intact, with only the opening words adjusted to better fit the Wikipedia article. These have occured throughout the article; the phrase dealt extensively with the donor community during the 2005 earthquake that hit Northern Pakistan
is identical to the source's wording (14). Unfortunately, the Copyvio Detector is not a good guide: many of these violations occur in sources where the likelihood of copying is said to be "Violation unlikely"—14.5% for source 45 and 13.0% for source 14, yet both are clear violations. Now, some of these will be quotes, which is allowed, but I don't have time to go down to the 8% level, which is the lowest I've personally ever found evidence of copyvio or close paraphrasing. I'm afraid I'm going to have to leave the rest to you: you'll have to look through the
copyvio check on Hina Rabbani Khar and use your own words in place of (or delete, or perhaps quote if appropriate) the copied text. I'm happy to check it after it's complete.
There is one thing that I think still needs clarification in the article, and that is why Khar's time as Foreign Minister came to an end. My understanding is that the PPP's five-year election mandate ran out, and there was no agreement on an interim cabinet between the various factions, so the government had to be replaced by a caretaker prime minister and cabinet while the election was scheduled, thus Khar was out of a cabinet job. But I realize my understanding is likely incomplete, if not potentially inaccurate, and the actual info would also need a new source that described the change and its effective date. Please find and add that when you can. Thanks, and sorry for the less than joyous news. BlueMoonset ( talk) 06:46, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
I did some final checks, adjusted one quote and did a bit more work on one section of close paraphrasing, and I'm happy to say that I'm satisfied with the excellent work jcc has done to bring this article back up to GA quality. As I noted earlier, the Copyvio Detector's weakness is that it can't distinguish between inappropriate copying and valid quoting; the quoting in the article is fine and doesn't need to be reduced, in my opinion.
This reassessment is being closed as "kept". Congratulations. BlueMoonset ( talk) 05:12, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
There are some faults in the article, which I found out. Firstly there are many places where there are only general references only, but no inline citations. There is also original research in the infobox for Minister of State for Finance and Economics Affairs there are dates and predecessor and successor which are not sourced, which also applies to birth date and religion. There are many dead links which have made difficult to verifu facts stated in the article. Also the article has no information post 2012/13 and says nothing about the end of tenure as foreign minister.
RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (
talk)
08:44, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Although Royrobdeb has not edited on Wikipedia for over four months, this individual reassessment should continue because the article clearly needs significant work to meet the GA criteria. I have checked, and the only real work since this was opened 15 months ago has been to the lead section.
There are a number of issues beyond those raised by Royroydeb. Unfortunately, one of them is the revised lead section, which is now four paragraphs, longer than an article of just under 10,000 prose characters should be (the recommended length is one to two paragraphs, and I'd certainly expect two). Also, there is much information in the lead that does not appear in the article proper, including the end of the third paragraph and the entire final paragraph. This all needs to be added to the body, preferably with additional details, while some may not be needed here in the lead.
Other issues include:
That's it for the moment. I plan to allow the standard seven days for these issues to be addressed, though if work is in progress, since there is a lot to do, I will naturally extend the time. BlueMoonset ( talk) 17:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
jcc, again there's great improvement, and I thought to do a final edit this evening to get the article to the point that I could happily sign off on it. Unfortunately, I've found some instances of close paraphrasing verging on copyvio while doing so, and after taking care of several instances, I hit my limit. Some past contributors have, unfortunately, thought nothing of copying in a sentence or two from an article—not even attempting to paraphrase, and in at least one instance, combining separate bits into a single quote and not distinguishing which were Khar's words and which the publication's author's. Source 45 (from tribune.com.pk/story/333452) is a case in point: the opening sentence of the source is copied virtually intact, with only the opening words adjusted to better fit the Wikipedia article. These have occured throughout the article; the phrase dealt extensively with the donor community during the 2005 earthquake that hit Northern Pakistan
is identical to the source's wording (14). Unfortunately, the Copyvio Detector is not a good guide: many of these violations occur in sources where the likelihood of copying is said to be "Violation unlikely"—14.5% for source 45 and 13.0% for source 14, yet both are clear violations. Now, some of these will be quotes, which is allowed, but I don't have time to go down to the 8% level, which is the lowest I've personally ever found evidence of copyvio or close paraphrasing. I'm afraid I'm going to have to leave the rest to you: you'll have to look through the
copyvio check on Hina Rabbani Khar and use your own words in place of (or delete, or perhaps quote if appropriate) the copied text. I'm happy to check it after it's complete.
There is one thing that I think still needs clarification in the article, and that is why Khar's time as Foreign Minister came to an end. My understanding is that the PPP's five-year election mandate ran out, and there was no agreement on an interim cabinet between the various factions, so the government had to be replaced by a caretaker prime minister and cabinet while the election was scheduled, thus Khar was out of a cabinet job. But I realize my understanding is likely incomplete, if not potentially inaccurate, and the actual info would also need a new source that described the change and its effective date. Please find and add that when you can. Thanks, and sorry for the less than joyous news. BlueMoonset ( talk) 06:46, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
I did some final checks, adjusted one quote and did a bit more work on one section of close paraphrasing, and I'm happy to say that I'm satisfied with the excellent work jcc has done to bring this article back up to GA quality. As I noted earlier, the Copyvio Detector's weakness is that it can't distinguish between inappropriate copying and valid quoting; the quoting in the article is fine and doesn't need to be reduced, in my opinion.
This reassessment is being closed as "kept". Congratulations. BlueMoonset ( talk) 05:12, 30 October 2016 (UTC)