Peter Obi is currently a Politics and government good article nominee. Nominated by Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! at 22:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: Nigerian politician and businessman |
Peter Obi was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (July 1, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Peter Obi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is written in Nigerian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realize, travelled, centre) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 18:23, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: SafariScribe ( talk · contribs) 12:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Samoht27 ( talk · contribs) 16:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
I'll undertake reviewing this nomination.
The article passes this criteria, small vandalism has occurred in the past, but the article is not part of any large vandalism campaign or edit war.
Lead image should be enough to fit this criteria, I am unsure about the copyright status of the image used. The image comes from a news publication, which usually has images protected by copyright. Though I wasn't able to find a specific copyright statement on the publication's website, it's likely the images used in the publication are still protected. If I find some definitive proof of the image's copyright status, the article will pass this criteria easily.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: SafariScribe ( talk · contribs) 12:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Czarking0 ( talk · contribs) 21:34, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Quick fail on ground of copyright violation. I made a few edits to improve this but there is more work to be done. Also the fact that the copyvivo is finding his party's page is highly concerning for the neutrality of the article and editors.
@ 102.89.22.60 ( talk) 10:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Here is the earliest capture of the source that I marked as a copyvivo issue in the GAN. @ SafariScribe marked on my talk page this source may actually be copying wikipedia. Upon further inspection to the edit history of the article, I see that several of the phrases marked as copyvivo were written on this article before the first capture of the source. I think that is sufficient for a good-faith belief that the article is not in copyright violation. Therefore, if SafariScribe opens a new review I will happily reconsider. Czarking0 ( talk) 19:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: SafariScribe ( talk · contribs) 22:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Czarking0 ( talk · contribs) 14:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
I currently have a lot of comments under coverage just in the first section. I don't think it is worth being more through until those are addressed.
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. |
Controversy section is a little iffy. Panama papers is the only thing in here. It could make sense to incorporate this into other sections. I recommend you come back to this point after addressing the others.
| |
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. |
I am made some mention of citations that need publishers below. Other than that I have not found any issues yet. I have not been through them all and I will need to recheck if the coverage is expanded. | |
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). |
I think a major question is are the sources reliable? I expect that a lot of these are used on several WP Nigeria pages but I am not familiar with them so if they are not on the WP:RSP then we should investigate each of them and demonstrate reliability. Here are the sources I'd like to see.
| |
2c. it contains no original research. |
My first analysis cannto find any but I will need to recheck if the coverage is expanded. | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. |
The author and I have discussed this. See previous GA and talk page for more details | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. |
I think there are some significant coverage issues. However, I understand that there may not be the requisite sources to cover all these points. Here is what I think needs to be added:
| |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). |
The other issues are so significant, I can't really call something out here as out of scope. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. |
I would probably not pass this article as neutral in the current state. However, it is difficult to say since there is so little coverage. Neutrality concerns I have are: what did he do in office, why was he impeached. I think the percentage of this article that is devoted to panama papers is probably undue weight given how little info there is about anything else. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. |
I'd give this lukewarm pass. There are quite a few reverted edits. However given that several of those are from IP users and they don't defend their edits I'd let it go unless more issues are brought. | |
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 no images. Given that he is a 21st century politician I would expect to be able to find some usable image of him. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. |
Peter Obi is currently a Politics and government good article nominee. Nominated by Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! at 22:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: Nigerian politician and businessman |
Peter Obi was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (July 1, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Peter Obi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is written in Nigerian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realize, travelled, centre) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 18:23, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: SafariScribe ( talk · contribs) 12:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Samoht27 ( talk · contribs) 16:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
I'll undertake reviewing this nomination.
The article passes this criteria, small vandalism has occurred in the past, but the article is not part of any large vandalism campaign or edit war.
Lead image should be enough to fit this criteria, I am unsure about the copyright status of the image used. The image comes from a news publication, which usually has images protected by copyright. Though I wasn't able to find a specific copyright statement on the publication's website, it's likely the images used in the publication are still protected. If I find some definitive proof of the image's copyright status, the article will pass this criteria easily.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: SafariScribe ( talk · contribs) 12:51, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Czarking0 ( talk · contribs) 21:34, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Quick fail on ground of copyright violation. I made a few edits to improve this but there is more work to be done. Also the fact that the copyvivo is finding his party's page is highly concerning for the neutrality of the article and editors.
@ 102.89.22.60 ( talk) 10:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Here is the earliest capture of the source that I marked as a copyvivo issue in the GAN. @ SafariScribe marked on my talk page this source may actually be copying wikipedia. Upon further inspection to the edit history of the article, I see that several of the phrases marked as copyvivo were written on this article before the first capture of the source. I think that is sufficient for a good-faith belief that the article is not in copyright violation. Therefore, if SafariScribe opens a new review I will happily reconsider. Czarking0 ( talk) 19:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: SafariScribe ( talk · contribs) 22:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Czarking0 ( talk · contribs) 14:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
I currently have a lot of comments under coverage just in the first section. I don't think it is worth being more through until those are addressed.
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. |
Controversy section is a little iffy. Panama papers is the only thing in here. It could make sense to incorporate this into other sections. I recommend you come back to this point after addressing the others.
| |
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. |
I am made some mention of citations that need publishers below. Other than that I have not found any issues yet. I have not been through them all and I will need to recheck if the coverage is expanded. | |
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). |
I think a major question is are the sources reliable? I expect that a lot of these are used on several WP Nigeria pages but I am not familiar with them so if they are not on the WP:RSP then we should investigate each of them and demonstrate reliability. Here are the sources I'd like to see.
| |
2c. it contains no original research. |
My first analysis cannto find any but I will need to recheck if the coverage is expanded. | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. |
The author and I have discussed this. See previous GA and talk page for more details | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. |
I think there are some significant coverage issues. However, I understand that there may not be the requisite sources to cover all these points. Here is what I think needs to be added:
| |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). |
The other issues are so significant, I can't really call something out here as out of scope. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. |
I would probably not pass this article as neutral in the current state. However, it is difficult to say since there is so little coverage. Neutrality concerns I have are: what did he do in office, why was he impeached. I think the percentage of this article that is devoted to panama papers is probably undue weight given how little info there is about anything else. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. |
I'd give this lukewarm pass. There are quite a few reverted edits. However given that several of those are from IP users and they don't defend their edits I'd let it go unless more issues are brought. | |
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 no images. Given that he is a 21st century politician I would expect to be able to find some usable image of him. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. |