Talk:Bukit Kutu/GA1

Latest comment: 4 years ago by MSG17 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: MSG17 (talk · contribs) 23:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)Reply


Criteria

edit
Good Article Status - Review Criteria

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
  2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  3. Verifiable with no original research:
  4. (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);[2]
    (c) it contains no original research; and
    (d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  5. Broad in its coverage:
  6. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  7. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  8. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  9. [4]
  10. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  11. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]

Review

edit
  1. Well-written:
  2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) The article is riddled with grammar errors. Grammatical articles (the and a) are continually left out. In addition, the tenses don't match up for nouns and verbs (ex. using is for multiple nouns in a list or plural nouns, or shifting from past to present sentence in a confusing way or on accident). Considering your past content, I am quite surprised. Is this a direct translation of some sort, or an article you nominated for GA too soon?   Fail
    (b) (MoS) Not much to say about MOS given it's short length. {{Use Commonwealth English}} should be at the top of the page instead of its American counterpart, as the article is about Malaysia and the former template is used for Malaysian English (along with the English used in several other countries).   Fail
  3. Verifiable with no original research:
  4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) Inline citations are properly used and formatted.   Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) Good use of reliable sources throughout. Pity there isn't much to source in the first place.   Pass
    (c) (original research) All statements are backed up by RSes. No issue here.   Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) Earwig returned nothing. I don't see any evidence of copyvios myself.   Pass
  5. Broad in its coverage:
  6. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) Coverage of the main topic is quite short, mostly consisting of a short history. For example, the geography section should have a general overview on the environment and landscape in and around the town, but only mentions a catchment area and a mosquito species discovered there. Considering that the town was a formal hill station, I would expect more information to exist about its natural geography. This is definitely not broad enough for GA.   Fail
    (b) (focused) The (small amount of) content in the article is relevant information about the article's topic.   Pass
  7. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  8. Notes Result
    The small size of the article means that I can't really find enough content to assess the neutrality of.   Neutral
  9. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  10. Notes Result
    No edit warring or constant reverting here.   Pass
  11. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  12. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) All images used are under the proper CC licenses or are public domain.   Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) Given the short length of the article, the images are used as well as possible under the cicrumstances. I think the caption of the image in the page body could do with more details (what bungalow is it at? What is the view of?), but I think that's not much of a problem compared to the other aspects of the page.   Neutral

Result

edit
Result Notes
  Fail Sorry, I'm going to have to quickfail this one. While the references are good and the image use is fine, the rest of the article is not up to standards. I think with more work to expand the article's coverage of the ghost town and some copyediting you could get a GA-class article in the future, but it is definitely nowhere near that right now.

Discussion

edit
  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.