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.
|
|
|
1b. it complies with the
Manual of Style guidelines for
lead sections,
layout,
words to watch,
fiction, and
list incorporation.
|
- Sure. All three sources mention the monument to the fighters against the Comintern and the Russian diaspora in Harbin.
Europeismo (
talk)
18:31, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
reply
|
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.
|
- "The street was originally named..." This sentence is uncited.
|
|
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).
|
- The first source, the Harbin Times, should be italicized and capitalized, and given an English translation of the newspaper name and article title. Is there a specific author given?
Done. There isn't a specific autor. --
Europeismo (
talk)
16:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
reply
- The Pervukhin source - what makes china-voyage.com a reliable source?
- Smirnov appears to be a deadlink/404 - please add an archive link or swap in a new, live link. Is it an academic paper? Does it have a DOI?
Done --
Europeismo (
talk)
16:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Who is VG? Can you make a case for belrussia.ru being a reliable source (Voice of an emigrant)
- Can you make a case for artz.ru being a reliable source? (Art and architecture of Russian diaspora)
- The final source, #19, appears to be identical to the first - please combine.
-
Comment: Changed 'journal' parameter to The Harbin Times, but it refers to different articles in the same newspaper, so I think it's better to keep the sources separated. --
Europeismo (
talk)
16:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
reply
- Under Bibliography, I don't understand how the linking is formatted for Kozlov.
Done. Link format changed. --
Europeismo (
talk)
18:31, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
reply
Done. All titles are romanized. --
Europeismo (
talk)
19:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
reply
|
|
2c. it contains
no original research.
|
|
|
2d. it contains no
copyright violations or
plagiarism.
|
- Nothing found by Earwig, but it wouldn't work very well with these sources; hold for manual check.
|
3. Broad in its coverage:
|
|
3a. it addresses the
main aspects of the topic.
|
- Not able to find anything else about the subject in reliable sources. Pass.
|
|
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see
summary style).
|
|
|
4.
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
|
|
|
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing
edit war or content dispute.
|
|
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.
|
- Tags appear to be valid - 1941 --> 1991 is before URAA date in China. Pass.
|
|
6b. media are
relevant to the topic, and have
suitable captions.
|
|
|
7. Overall assessment.
|
|