Talk:Gent Strazimiri/GA1

Latest comment: 13 years ago by Quadell in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer:Quadell (talk) 22:19, 10 August 2011 (UTC)Reply
Nominator: User:Vinie007

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
  1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. There are frequent places where the English seems non-standard. Phrases like "He has been from 2007 until 2009 member" or "Strazimiri finished the faculty of Law, and graduated on the University of Tirana" need to be rewritten. Also the first sentences all begin "Strazimiri is...", "He was...", "Strazimiri is...", "Stazimiri is...", "Strazimiri was...", "Strazimiri became...", etc., which could be improved a lot. I'd recommend sending this article to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors.
  1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lead section), the lede section should summarize all sections of the body. This four-sentence lede omits many sections.

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Embedded lists, lists should usually be incorporated into prose, when possible. Having this many lists makes it look like a c.v. The "education" list is already in the prose, and should be removed, while the other list should be described in prose. The timeline is very good, though it should probably not be its own section.

2. Verifiable with no original research:
  2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. Sources listed in the "References" section should be formatted in such a way that the reader can tell who created them, what the document is called, what language it's it, etc. Some sources, like this word document, cannot be verified as anything reliable without this information. You may find it helpful to use citation templates to format the sources.
  2b. 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). All of the important statements are sourced. But since only one of the sources is in English, I am unable to check to see whether the sources back up the statements, or whether there is close paraphrasing going on. (I have no reason to think there is; I just am not able to check.)
  2c. it contains no original research. No problems with this.
3. Broad in its coverage:
  3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. This is a very short article about an important person. As a national political figure, there has to be more material available on his background, his work in the assembly, etc.
  3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). No problems with this.
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Not long enough to have neutrality problems.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Not a problem.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. No images, so no problems.
  6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. As a nationally recognized figure, it should be possible for someone to photograph him. There are many non-free Flickr photos, and many times the Flickr photographers can be convinced to license the photo under a free license if that means we can use the photo on Wikipedia. Even if a photo of him cannot be obtained, there could be pics of the administrative building of the the assembly, or of the district he represents, or something.
  7. Overall assessment. This article does not meet GA standards at this time.