GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Nominator: CommissarDoggo ( talk · contribs) 19:41, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Czarking0 ( talk · contribs) 23:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello and thank you for your contributions. I think with a little bit of work this article can make GA.
As a side note I saw you had some Russian proficency and thought you might enjoy my recent article Zemstvo.
Now let's get to it
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. | |
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). |
|
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. |
|
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. | |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
Ok, looking through the review I'll go through what you've added.
1a. I was completely unaware of that, I've now sorted that issue.
2d. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this one, when I was fixing 1a I searched for certain words included in your quote and couldn't find any mention of that, could you point out where in the article I used that?
3a. I actually remember searching for more information on this and didn't find anything about it, nor could I figure out what version of the China medal he would have received, so the mention will simply have to be removed.
3b. I can cut this down, yes, and will get to that at some point today. CommissarDoggo Talk? 05:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
My suggestions:
Czarking0 ( talk) 23:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
My apologies, I didn't realise you'd already responded in the section for citations, so I'll go over the comment you added. That PDF isn't a book, it's quite a well researched (and well cited, looking at the bottom of each page) paper on the general incident by Roman Kodet, a historian and Japanologist from the University of West Bohemia. Here is the introduction given on the university's page: Professional historian and Japanologist working as an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Arts of the University of West Bohemia in Pilsen. He is a specialist in early modern Japanese history and the Meiji Period. During his career, he specialized in the history of the samurai class, Japan's relations with the Western world, and cultural history. In 2018 he established a Center of Japanese Studies, through which he cooperates with institutions in Japan and worldwide.
To clarify, there doesn't seem to be any guidance against the use of PDF's, so I would ask what makes it a bad citation? CommissarDoggo Talk? 11:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Nominator: CommissarDoggo ( talk · contribs) 19:41, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Czarking0 ( talk · contribs) 23:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello and thank you for your contributions. I think with a little bit of work this article can make GA.
As a side note I saw you had some Russian proficency and thought you might enjoy my recent article Zemstvo.
Now let's get to it
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. | |
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). |
|
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. |
|
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. | |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
Ok, looking through the review I'll go through what you've added.
1a. I was completely unaware of that, I've now sorted that issue.
2d. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this one, when I was fixing 1a I searched for certain words included in your quote and couldn't find any mention of that, could you point out where in the article I used that?
3a. I actually remember searching for more information on this and didn't find anything about it, nor could I figure out what version of the China medal he would have received, so the mention will simply have to be removed.
3b. I can cut this down, yes, and will get to that at some point today. CommissarDoggo Talk? 05:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
My suggestions:
Czarking0 ( talk) 23:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
My apologies, I didn't realise you'd already responded in the section for citations, so I'll go over the comment you added. That PDF isn't a book, it's quite a well researched (and well cited, looking at the bottom of each page) paper on the general incident by Roman Kodet, a historian and Japanologist from the University of West Bohemia. Here is the introduction given on the university's page: Professional historian and Japanologist working as an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Arts of the University of West Bohemia in Pilsen. He is a specialist in early modern Japanese history and the Meiji Period. During his career, he specialized in the history of the samurai class, Japan's relations with the Western world, and cultural history. In 2018 he established a Center of Japanese Studies, through which he cooperates with institutions in Japan and worldwide.
To clarify, there doesn't seem to be any guidance against the use of PDF's, so I would ask what makes it a bad citation? CommissarDoggo Talk? 11:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)