GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Katolophyromai ( talk · contribs) 02:38, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
I will review this article. It deals with a very important and encyclopedic subject that has great significance to literature and society at large. On a side note, I would like to mention that I have nominated the article ancient Greek literature in this same category, as well as the articles Inanna, Enlil, Anunnaki, Athena, Jonah, and Pythagoras in the "Philosophy and religion" category, all of which are currently awaiting review. -- Katolophyromai ( talk) 02:38, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
First order of business: This article has a lot of statements that are currently uncited. I am fine with passing the article with a few uncited statements, but the current level is unacceptable. I have tagged all of the statements that require sources. I expect the nominator to either remove these statements or find sources to support them. I have also tagged one uncited statement as dubious because it claimed that most English speakers do not know what the word "cobbler" means, which I suspect is false. It may not be a commonly used word, but it certainly is not "unknown." I tagged the final section, entitled "Noteworthy proverb scholars (paremiologists and paremiographers)" as needing to be converted into prose. If these people are really important enough to be mentioned in the article, you need to explain who they are and how their work is significant, not just drop in a list with a bunch of names on it.
In general, having read it over a few times, I have noticed a number of obvious problems with this article:
I will not fail the article yet, because I still think it may be able to pass, but only with a considerable amount of effort. I will provide much more extensive criticism in the coming days. -- Katolophyromai ( talk) 03:18, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
I hope no one minds, but I just went through and organized the article into sections and subsections because the lack of organization was really bothering me. If anyone disagrees with how I have organized it, feel free to make adjustments as you think are necessary. -- Katolophyromai ( talk) 17:43, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
I am going to have to fail this article. Progress has been made, but the article is still a long way off from meeting all of the GA criteria and, at the current rate, I think it will take several months at least before the article is ready for GA. Some major concerns include:
Things have definitely improved, though. The citation quality is certainly much better than it was before this review started. I look foreword to possibly reviewing this article again once it is in better condition.
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
· · · |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Katolophyromai ( talk · contribs) 02:38, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
I will review this article. It deals with a very important and encyclopedic subject that has great significance to literature and society at large. On a side note, I would like to mention that I have nominated the article ancient Greek literature in this same category, as well as the articles Inanna, Enlil, Anunnaki, Athena, Jonah, and Pythagoras in the "Philosophy and religion" category, all of which are currently awaiting review. -- Katolophyromai ( talk) 02:38, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
First order of business: This article has a lot of statements that are currently uncited. I am fine with passing the article with a few uncited statements, but the current level is unacceptable. I have tagged all of the statements that require sources. I expect the nominator to either remove these statements or find sources to support them. I have also tagged one uncited statement as dubious because it claimed that most English speakers do not know what the word "cobbler" means, which I suspect is false. It may not be a commonly used word, but it certainly is not "unknown." I tagged the final section, entitled "Noteworthy proverb scholars (paremiologists and paremiographers)" as needing to be converted into prose. If these people are really important enough to be mentioned in the article, you need to explain who they are and how their work is significant, not just drop in a list with a bunch of names on it.
In general, having read it over a few times, I have noticed a number of obvious problems with this article:
I will not fail the article yet, because I still think it may be able to pass, but only with a considerable amount of effort. I will provide much more extensive criticism in the coming days. -- Katolophyromai ( talk) 03:18, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
I hope no one minds, but I just went through and organized the article into sections and subsections because the lack of organization was really bothering me. If anyone disagrees with how I have organized it, feel free to make adjustments as you think are necessary. -- Katolophyromai ( talk) 17:43, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
I am going to have to fail this article. Progress has been made, but the article is still a long way off from meeting all of the GA criteria and, at the current rate, I think it will take several months at least before the article is ready for GA. Some major concerns include:
Things have definitely improved, though. The citation quality is certainly much better than it was before this review started. I look foreword to possibly reviewing this article again once it is in better condition.
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
· · · |