Talk:12-3 incident/GA1
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Jp16103 in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Marqoz (talk · contribs) 02:48, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
I do strongly vote against Good Articel nomination for the article and this is why.
- The article lacks NEUTRALITY esp. lack of discussion on:
- Chinese communists' involvement in instigation of these social disturbances;
- PRC military pressure on the colony esp. demonstration of power on the frontiers;
- Real power division between Lisbon and Beijing after the event
- The article lacks BALANCED SOURCE BASE:
- The Portuguese and American sources are cited only in general contexts in no relevance to these exact events, which are supported solely by Chinese (PRC) sources.
- The article needs more stylistically neutral phrasing and openness for distinct PoVs.
Having all these in mind the article while having important factual information, needs new sources to cover neutrality issues and some wording correction to express objectivity, to be considered for Good Article Nomination.
- Following up on this, @Jp16103: - are you still willing to be nominator? If so, I can help complete a full review since @Marqoz: has not been active for over a month. Otherwise, this review is likely to be closed. Thanks, Kingsif (talk) 04:40, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Kingsif: Hi, yes I am still willing to be the nominator, I must have missed Marqoz' initial review. Thanks. Jp16103 12:41, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Kingsif: thank you for the reminder, i was some time offline due to health issues and thank you for refreshing that. And yes, i support my initial review statement. I know from my own experience, how this kind of hybrid misinformation works. We can't fight it fully. We have our only protection: the policy of being neutral. All sources should be related in a neutral manner and balanced by the other side. Otherwise cut suspected paragraphs off. And i will insist on it Marqoz (talk) 18:40, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Marqoz, thank you for your assessment, your constructive criticism will help make this article better. I agree with your assessment, I think I definitely could expand upon PRC military pressure and communist influence in Macau before the incident, and this article could use some expansion in the areas you suggested. I have no objections closing this nomination, before submitting I had not properly vetted all of the sources. JP Jp16103 20:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Jp16103: are you saying you want to withdraw the nomination? Also pinging @BlueMoonset: to this discussion. Kingsif (talk) 22:32, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Marqoz, thank you for your assessment, your constructive criticism will help make this article better. I agree with your assessment, I think I definitely could expand upon PRC military pressure and communist influence in Macau before the incident, and this article could use some expansion in the areas you suggested. I have no objections closing this nomination, before submitting I had not properly vetted all of the sources. JP Jp16103 20:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
I'm going to boldly close this as a fail since Jp16103 has been regularly active since the last ping several weeks ago but hasn't responded. Kingsif (talk) 04:46, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- No objections here, article definitely isn't GA material yet. Thanks for the input everyone Jp16103 13:20, 4 June 2020 (UTC)