Talk:Bukit Kutu/GA1
Latest comment: 4 years ago by MSG17 in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: MSG17 (talk · contribs) 23:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Criteria
editGood Article Status - Review Criteria
A good article is—
- Well-written:
- (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]
- Verifiable with no original research:
- (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.
- Broad in its coverage:
- (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).
- Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
- Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. [4]
- Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: [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- Well-written:
- Verifiable with no original research:
- Broad in its coverage:
- Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
- Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
- Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
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 |
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 |
Notes | Result |
---|---|
The small size of the article means that I can't really find enough content to assess the neutrality of. | Neutral |
Notes | Result |
---|---|
No edit warring or constant reverting here. | Pass |
Result
editDiscussion
edit- ^ 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.
- ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
- ^ 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.