GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Wugapodes ( talk · contribs) 01:36, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Will review.
Wugapodes (
talk)
01:36, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
It doesn't seem that there were any major changes since the last GA nom ( diff), particularly with regards to the prose. The entire article seems to lack an encyclopedic tone seeming more like a narrative in structure and in style. I feel like there is both unneccesary and possibly undue diversion into his political opinions. I mean, he is notable for his writing, right? I mean, the lead lists him as "a Brazilian journalist, political pundit, novelist and critic." Yet the article overwhelmingly focuses on the intimate details of his political philosophy with only minor mention of his journalism and criticism work and the discussion of his fiction writing was so thick that I could barely read or understand it. As stated in the previous review, selected works are inherently non-neutral and a form of cherry-picking. I think this article is in severe need of a peer review and copy edit, as well as a massive trim to its prose size.
Second Opinion I think this article is a very long way from satisfying criteria 1, 3, and 4, however I'm wary of a quick fail because I don't have particularly concrete suggestions on how to improve it. I'm going to see if another editor would be willing to give the article a look over and what their opinion would be. Wugapodes ( talk) 02:30, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Not listed I agree with BlueMoonset and so am closing this as not listed. Wugapodes ( talk) 19:00, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Wugapodes ( talk · contribs) 01:36, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Will review.
Wugapodes (
talk)
01:36, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
It doesn't seem that there were any major changes since the last GA nom ( diff), particularly with regards to the prose. The entire article seems to lack an encyclopedic tone seeming more like a narrative in structure and in style. I feel like there is both unneccesary and possibly undue diversion into his political opinions. I mean, he is notable for his writing, right? I mean, the lead lists him as "a Brazilian journalist, political pundit, novelist and critic." Yet the article overwhelmingly focuses on the intimate details of his political philosophy with only minor mention of his journalism and criticism work and the discussion of his fiction writing was so thick that I could barely read or understand it. As stated in the previous review, selected works are inherently non-neutral and a form of cherry-picking. I think this article is in severe need of a peer review and copy edit, as well as a massive trim to its prose size.
Second Opinion I think this article is a very long way from satisfying criteria 1, 3, and 4, however I'm wary of a quick fail because I don't have particularly concrete suggestions on how to improve it. I'm going to see if another editor would be willing to give the article a look over and what their opinion would be. Wugapodes ( talk) 02:30, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Not listed I agree with BlueMoonset and so am closing this as not listed. Wugapodes ( talk) 19:00, 27 August 2015 (UTC)