GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: PCN02WPS ( talk · contribs) 17:52, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'll be reviewing this article shortly.
PCN02WPS (
talk |
contribs)
17:52, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
I've left comments on each of the article's sections, so I'll place the nominations on hold to give you time to address them. No rush. PCN02WPS ( talk | contribs) 03:05, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
The lead is fine, if not a little short; perhaps a bit from the "history" section could be placed there before "created in 2007" as a bit of context.
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. | I made a few minor edits to clean up minor grammar issues, so I have no issues with grammar that I can see. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | There are a few instances of weasel words, particularly the phrase "it is believed that..." or the like. I have tagged the two instances I found with {{ By whom}} in hopes that they can be clarified. |
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. | |
![]() |
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). | There are a few paragraphs, namely in the early history section, that go quite a ways without a citation. In that particular section, the first paragraph goes from "Another kingdom, Berayu..." to "...the help of the Dutch in 1916" with just two citations after the latter sentence. Is all of that information covered by those two references? |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Earwig gave a 0.0% similarity. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | |
![]() |
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. | All images are used properly; no fair use. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Nomination remains on hold pending the comments in the table above. |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: PCN02WPS ( talk · contribs) 17:52, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'll be reviewing this article shortly.
PCN02WPS (
talk |
contribs)
17:52, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
I've left comments on each of the article's sections, so I'll place the nominations on hold to give you time to address them. No rush. PCN02WPS ( talk | contribs) 03:05, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
The lead is fine, if not a little short; perhaps a bit from the "history" section could be placed there before "created in 2007" as a bit of context.
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. | I made a few minor edits to clean up minor grammar issues, so I have no issues with grammar that I can see. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | There are a few instances of weasel words, particularly the phrase "it is believed that..." or the like. I have tagged the two instances I found with {{ By whom}} in hopes that they can be clarified. |
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. | |
![]() |
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). | There are a few paragraphs, namely in the early history section, that go quite a ways without a citation. In that particular section, the first paragraph goes from "Another kingdom, Berayu..." to "...the help of the Dutch in 1916" with just two citations after the latter sentence. Is all of that information covered by those two references? |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Earwig gave a 0.0% similarity. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | |
![]() |
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. | All images are used properly; no fair use. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Nomination remains on hold pending the comments in the table above. |