![]() | Masumi Mitsui has been listed as one of the
Warfare 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: April 3, 2016. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Saskoiler ( talk · contribs) 02:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
It's my pleasure to take on a GA review of this article. I will assess one criterion at a time, capturing the assessment in the table which follows. After the table, I'll list items which I believe need attention, if any. --
Saskoiler (
talk)
02:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Overall, the prose in this article is fantastic. It's articulate, clear, and easy to follow.
I have identified a few minor issues to look into. See below: Prose — Update: All of the prose suggestions have been addressed, along with other prose improvements to the article. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Lead - The lead does a good job of concisely summarizing the article content. Interestingly, the first paragraph of the lead is a condensed summary of the second paragraph of the lead, which is itself a condensed summary of the article. It's good.
Layout - The article is intuitively organized, divided into appropriate sections and subsections. I have one minor question regarding categorization of the article. See below: Categories — Update: I made this minor change myself. Words to Watch - No problems detected. Fiction - n/a List incorporation - n/a |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | There is a "References" section with 16 references drawn from 5 works. The references are neatly layed out using a consistent style. |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | All citations are from reliable sources: mainstream newspaper articles, journal articles, etc. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | I checked each of the citations (except one which requires a subscription), and the article reflects the source material, subject to some prose observations (discussed under "Prose"). There's no sign of original research. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | There is no evidence of copyright violations or plagiarism. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Main aspects of the topic -- birth in Japan, emigration to Canada, World War I, interwar period, internment during World War II, and later years -- are all addressed. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | The article is focused. Subtopics are presented in reasonable balance. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | The article is presented with neutral language and prose. I do not sense any editorial bias. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | The article is stable. There is no edit war or content dispute. Indeed, nearly all edits for this article are from the GA nominator. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | There are two images provided with this article. Both have their copyright status clearly stated. One is in the public domain; the other is a Flickr CC image. Both okay. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | The first image (Mitsui himself) is integral to the article. The second is of secondary importance, but still relevant. Both have suitable captions. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | This is an excellent short article. I feel that I've been educated and enlightened. I am inspired to learn more; perhaps someday I'll create the article for the red-linked war memorial in Stanley Park. I'm certainly going to pay a visit the next time I'm there.
I've made a few very minor copyedits to the article and identified below a small number of issues to address for this article. Once that is done, I intend to pass this GA review. In the meantime, I'll set the review on hold to give time for the nominator (or someone else) to make updates. Update: All of my concerns raised below have been promptly addressed, and confusion over the medals Mitsui was awarded has also been rectified. I believe that this article now satisfies the GA criteria. Thank you for your efforts to enrich Wikipedia with this article. Pass |
The following is a list of items which need attention. Please respond to each to let me know when it is resolved, or enter an explanation to justify why it should not be changed.
Categories
Prose
Saskoiler ( talk) 18:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
![]() | Masumi Mitsui has been listed as one of the
Warfare 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: April 3, 2016. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Saskoiler ( talk · contribs) 02:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
It's my pleasure to take on a GA review of this article. I will assess one criterion at a time, capturing the assessment in the table which follows. After the table, I'll list items which I believe need attention, if any. --
Saskoiler (
talk)
02:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Overall, the prose in this article is fantastic. It's articulate, clear, and easy to follow.
I have identified a few minor issues to look into. See below: Prose — Update: All of the prose suggestions have been addressed, along with other prose improvements to the article. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Lead - The lead does a good job of concisely summarizing the article content. Interestingly, the first paragraph of the lead is a condensed summary of the second paragraph of the lead, which is itself a condensed summary of the article. It's good.
Layout - The article is intuitively organized, divided into appropriate sections and subsections. I have one minor question regarding categorization of the article. See below: Categories — Update: I made this minor change myself. Words to Watch - No problems detected. Fiction - n/a List incorporation - n/a |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | There is a "References" section with 16 references drawn from 5 works. The references are neatly layed out using a consistent style. |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | All citations are from reliable sources: mainstream newspaper articles, journal articles, etc. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | I checked each of the citations (except one which requires a subscription), and the article reflects the source material, subject to some prose observations (discussed under "Prose"). There's no sign of original research. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | There is no evidence of copyright violations or plagiarism. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Main aspects of the topic -- birth in Japan, emigration to Canada, World War I, interwar period, internment during World War II, and later years -- are all addressed. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | The article is focused. Subtopics are presented in reasonable balance. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | The article is presented with neutral language and prose. I do not sense any editorial bias. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | The article is stable. There is no edit war or content dispute. Indeed, nearly all edits for this article are from the GA nominator. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | There are two images provided with this article. Both have their copyright status clearly stated. One is in the public domain; the other is a Flickr CC image. Both okay. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | The first image (Mitsui himself) is integral to the article. The second is of secondary importance, but still relevant. Both have suitable captions. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | This is an excellent short article. I feel that I've been educated and enlightened. I am inspired to learn more; perhaps someday I'll create the article for the red-linked war memorial in Stanley Park. I'm certainly going to pay a visit the next time I'm there.
I've made a few very minor copyedits to the article and identified below a small number of issues to address for this article. Once that is done, I intend to pass this GA review. In the meantime, I'll set the review on hold to give time for the nominator (or someone else) to make updates. Update: All of my concerns raised below have been promptly addressed, and confusion over the medals Mitsui was awarded has also been rectified. I believe that this article now satisfies the GA criteria. Thank you for your efforts to enrich Wikipedia with this article. Pass |
The following is a list of items which need attention. Please respond to each to let me know when it is resolved, or enter an explanation to justify why it should not be changed.
Categories
Prose
Saskoiler ( talk) 18:36, 31 March 2016 (UTC)