The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I'll take this review; it will be used in the
WikiCup and the ongoing backlog drive. Initial impressions are positive.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk) 19:10, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline:
B.
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):
41 good, although a paragraph relying on a single citation may be
WP:UNDUE.
How critical is this? Ideally I wouldn't want to remove otherwise verifiable information if it's not heavily contested.
48 mostly good, but the source attributes an importance to regional and not just international diplomacy that doesn't come through in the article, and it notes informal relations with apartheid South Africa.
I specified "formal" relations. What changes are you hoping for regarding regional/international diplomacy? Both are covered to some extent.
13 I don't see where "became a major political issue as its severity became apparent in the 1990s" is supported in the text
Removed.
10 good
5 good
22 good 5x
2 good 2x
4 good 2x
25 good
Out of 19 individual citations checked, only a small proportion have problems. Therefore, source spotcheck Y passed.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk) 00:07, 31 March 2024 (UTC)reply
General comments
Nominator is
the primary author. As on a first inspection, there only appear to be minor issues with prose/MOS compliance, I'll do the source spotcheck first (above) to get it out of the way.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk) 19:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Which
WP:ENGVAR does this article use? It seems to follow neither BrE, CwE or AmE.
I added a BrE template and hopefully it lines up with that now.
Prose comments
Lead is generally good, but has a habit of saying "in Botswana" too often; I think we can take that for granted. The last paragraph is more stop-start than the others, so sentences could be combined.
Trimmed a few.
"The United Kingdom began involvement in the region in the 1820s" this is somewhat vague; the source says that British influence had been active since the 1920s, not that the UK was actively involved. You may also want to link
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
Reworded and linked.
"The Botswana National Front (BNF) was founded by Kenneth Koma as a left-wing party, and it became the opposition party in the 1969 general election." This sentence is somewhat of a non-sequitur with what comes before or after; you may want to move it to the end for flow reasons.
Done.
"the creation of the Botswana Defence Force in 1977" you may want to say that this is the country's military
Added.
"were identified by them as the Big Five whom they opposed." the passive voice is unhelpful, especially combined with the semi-unclear "they/them" use.
Reworded
"Although an appeal to the courts" for what?
Clarified.
"The legislature is responsible for serving as a check on the power of the executive. The legislature has little power to limit the actions of the executive branch, leading to concerns that it is unable to check executive power." I think this could be very easily simplified.
Done.
The "Legislative branch" subsection contains a hatnote to
Parliament of Botswana, but does not actually define what that is, meaning that it is unclear what "parliament" means later in the article.
Replaced all uses of "parliament" with "National Assembly", which is the actual relevant body in each case.
"There are currently eight judges" "currently" is sourced to a thirteen-year-old reference.
Removed both instances of "currently"
The "Political parties" and "Elections" sections could be made subsections of the "National government" section. I would also place the "Policy issues" section before the "Human rights" section.
I moved the policy issues and human rights sections. I'd rather not move political parties and elections under national government since they're not solely national institutions.
"In 2019, the Botswana National Front, the Botswana Congress Party, the Botswana Movement for Democracy, and the Botswana People's Party joined together as the Umbrella for Democratic Change." The UDC's article, which itself dates from 2014, says it began in 2012, so I think that 2019 date might need some adjusting/qualifying.
Fixed with new sources.
"are shaped by collectivist traditions such as botho rather than individualist traditions" could use some explanation/example.
I specified "botho philosophy" instead of just "botho". Is there anything specific I should add?
"As South Africa liberalised, Botswana's primary foreign policy concern became" a timeframe would be nice.
Added.
"Botswana practiced realpolitik foreign policy" is the grammar correct here? is an "a" needed between practiced and realpolitik? unsure.
I suspect that this is one of those circumstances where having an article is correct regardless, so I added it.
Putting this on hold while the above (minor) issues are sorted out.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk) 00:29, 31 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I'll take this review; it will be used in the
WikiCup and the ongoing backlog drive. Initial impressions are positive.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk) 19:10, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline:
B.
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):
41 good, although a paragraph relying on a single citation may be
WP:UNDUE.
How critical is this? Ideally I wouldn't want to remove otherwise verifiable information if it's not heavily contested.
48 mostly good, but the source attributes an importance to regional and not just international diplomacy that doesn't come through in the article, and it notes informal relations with apartheid South Africa.
I specified "formal" relations. What changes are you hoping for regarding regional/international diplomacy? Both are covered to some extent.
13 I don't see where "became a major political issue as its severity became apparent in the 1990s" is supported in the text
Removed.
10 good
5 good
22 good 5x
2 good 2x
4 good 2x
25 good
Out of 19 individual citations checked, only a small proportion have problems. Therefore, source spotcheck Y passed.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk) 00:07, 31 March 2024 (UTC)reply
General comments
Nominator is
the primary author. As on a first inspection, there only appear to be minor issues with prose/MOS compliance, I'll do the source spotcheck first (above) to get it out of the way.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk) 19:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Which
WP:ENGVAR does this article use? It seems to follow neither BrE, CwE or AmE.
I added a BrE template and hopefully it lines up with that now.
Prose comments
Lead is generally good, but has a habit of saying "in Botswana" too often; I think we can take that for granted. The last paragraph is more stop-start than the others, so sentences could be combined.
Trimmed a few.
"The United Kingdom began involvement in the region in the 1820s" this is somewhat vague; the source says that British influence had been active since the 1920s, not that the UK was actively involved. You may also want to link
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
Reworded and linked.
"The Botswana National Front (BNF) was founded by Kenneth Koma as a left-wing party, and it became the opposition party in the 1969 general election." This sentence is somewhat of a non-sequitur with what comes before or after; you may want to move it to the end for flow reasons.
Done.
"the creation of the Botswana Defence Force in 1977" you may want to say that this is the country's military
Added.
"were identified by them as the Big Five whom they opposed." the passive voice is unhelpful, especially combined with the semi-unclear "they/them" use.
Reworded
"Although an appeal to the courts" for what?
Clarified.
"The legislature is responsible for serving as a check on the power of the executive. The legislature has little power to limit the actions of the executive branch, leading to concerns that it is unable to check executive power." I think this could be very easily simplified.
Done.
The "Legislative branch" subsection contains a hatnote to
Parliament of Botswana, but does not actually define what that is, meaning that it is unclear what "parliament" means later in the article.
Replaced all uses of "parliament" with "National Assembly", which is the actual relevant body in each case.
"There are currently eight judges" "currently" is sourced to a thirteen-year-old reference.
Removed both instances of "currently"
The "Political parties" and "Elections" sections could be made subsections of the "National government" section. I would also place the "Policy issues" section before the "Human rights" section.
I moved the policy issues and human rights sections. I'd rather not move political parties and elections under national government since they're not solely national institutions.
"In 2019, the Botswana National Front, the Botswana Congress Party, the Botswana Movement for Democracy, and the Botswana People's Party joined together as the Umbrella for Democratic Change." The UDC's article, which itself dates from 2014, says it began in 2012, so I think that 2019 date might need some adjusting/qualifying.
Fixed with new sources.
"are shaped by collectivist traditions such as botho rather than individualist traditions" could use some explanation/example.
I specified "botho philosophy" instead of just "botho". Is there anything specific I should add?
"As South Africa liberalised, Botswana's primary foreign policy concern became" a timeframe would be nice.
Added.
"Botswana practiced realpolitik foreign policy" is the grammar correct here? is an "a" needed between practiced and realpolitik? unsure.
I suspect that this is one of those circumstances where having an article is correct regardless, so I added it.
Putting this on hold while the above (minor) issues are sorted out.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk) 00:29, 31 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.