Talk:Igbo people/GA2

GA Review

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

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status and should have the full review up soon. Dana boomer (talk) 00:31, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   • Text should not be "sandwiched" between images, quote boxes or tables, per WP:MOS.

   • Corrected it. Ukabia (talk) 04:26, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • There are a lot of links in the "See also" section. If links are used in the article as "main" articles under individual sections (i.e. the Igbo language link), then they don't need to be re-used in the See also section.

   • Corrected it. Ukabia (talk) 04:26, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • In the Performing Arts section the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs seem to be differently-worded duplicates of one another.

   • Never liked the 3rd paragraph, gone. Corrected it. Ukabia (talk) 03:53, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • Lists are discouraged. The list in the Religion and rites of passage section could easily be turned into prose, and the individual words should not be bolded.

   • Corrected it. Ukabia (talk) 03:53, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • In the last paragraph of the Religion and rites of passage section, it says "Children are also required to greet elders when as a sign of respect and good upbringing." I believe there is something missing after the "when"; otherwise, the sentence doesn't make sense grammatically.

   • Corrected it. Ukabia (talk) 03:53, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • In the Diaspora section, what does the sentence "Bishop Jakes is from the state of West Virginia." add to the article?

   • Corrected it. Ukabia (talk) 04:09, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • Due to my concerns about the sourcing (see below) I have not completed a complete prose check. Once I see improvements in the sourcing, I will conduct a full examination of the prose. However, due to the above issues, which I found in only a cursory check, I would suggest going over the article with an eye towards prose. It might also be a good idea to ask another editor who hasn't seen the article before to copyedit it for you.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   • I've added fact tags in several places where I would like to see references added. References are especially necessary when you say certain people are the "most famous" for this or that, when you say something is "popular" or for other opinion statements.

   • Corrected it. Ukabia (talk) 04:09, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • Web references need to all have access dates and publishers.

   • Corrected it. Ukabia (talk) 05:32, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • The formatting of the references needs to be standardized. You need to either use split referencing for all books or for none. The same goes for websites. I would suggest using split references for books and not for websites; this looks to be the best course of action for this article. You may do it as you wish, however, but just make sure that each type (books, websites, etc) are all the same within the type.

   I removed the split references. Ukabia (talk) 16:46, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • What makes Ref #28 (Onyeso) reliable? Same for Ref #37.

   • Corrected it. Ukabia (talk) 05:02, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • What makes Ref #58 (History of Jamaica) reliable?

   • Corrected it. Changed source. Ukabia (talk) 04:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • Ref #65 (Patois) gives a "Forbidden" error message when accessed.

   • Corrected it. Changed source. Ukabia (talk) 04:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • What makes Ref #95 (Highlife) reliable?

   • Corrected it. Changed source. Ukabia (talk) 05:02, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

   • What makes Ref #105 (Ene) reliable?

   • Corrected it. Ukabia (talk) 05:02, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I have some serious concerns about the sourcing and prose in this article. There are several unreliable refs, absolutely no consistency in the formatting of references, and several places missing references. Also, in just a cursory check of the prose, I found several places that needed work. I am placing this article on hold for now, pending further work by the editors of the article. I do feel that this article can probably be brought up to GA status within a short period of time if the editors are dedicated to improving the article. If you have any questions, please let me know. Dana boomer (talk) 01:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

• • Okay I will try and fix those points, thanks for reviewing. -- Ukabia (talk) 02:18, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Second Review

I'm starting a second set of comments, so that they don't get lost in the ones above.

• I apologize if I wasn't clear about the See also section links. They should be in the individual sections, rather than the See also section. So, what I wanted you to do was take them out of the See also section, rather than out of the individual sections.
• The lead is supposed to be a summary of the entire article, with no new information. For example, the lead states for a fact that almost a million died in the Nigerian-Biafran War, while in the text it states that it is believed that several million died, including many Igbos. Also, the lead spends too much time on the war while neglecting other areas. The War only takes up one paragraph in the body of the article (which is sufficient), but also takes up one full paragraph in the lead. I would suggest trimming the mention in the lead down to one or maybe two sentences. In its place, add a paragraph of information on the culture of the Igbos, which is almost completely neglected in the lead.

  I cut down the war to two sentences and added some info about language and farming. Ukabia (talk) 00:01, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

• In the first paragraph of the "Identity" section, you say "Alexander X. Byrd argues," Who is Alexander Byrd? If he is a notable historian, add something like "Historian Alexander Byrd" and wikilink his name if he has a WP article.

  He's not popular, I think. He's a a historian that wrote a book in the reference. I was trying to avoid 'some historians say...' but I've added that he's a professor Historian and rice university, which is his university I found this out on the university website Here. Ukabia (talk) 22:50, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

• In the "Traditional society" subsection, you say "Traditional Igbo political organization was based on a quasi-democratic republican system of government that guaranteed equality of the citizenry as against a feudalist "dictator king" in tight knit communities as witnessed by the Portuguese who first arrived and met with the Igbo people in the 15th century." This sentence is long and confusing in its comparison of republican tactics to feudalist kings. Please re-word and clarify.

  I did not write this, I don't know who did, but I've re-worded it. Ukabia (talk) 22:33, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

• In the last paragraph of the "Language and literature" section you say that Things Fall Apart is a novel. Being a novel means that it is fiction. Is this true?

  Yes. Ukabia (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

• In the "Dress" section, you say "beads were worn around the waist for medical reasons." Errr...medical?

  lol, slight translation problem. In the Igbo language spiritual powers or tools were also classed and had the same name with medical 'power' and tools. I'll change to spiritual. Ukabia (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

When you have finished these corrections, please drop me a note here and I will take a final look over the article. It is much improved from your work over the past day, and I look forward to seeing even more of an improvement. Dana boomer (talk) 21:28, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, so far things look good. I just have a one final comment, but it's fairly major:

• Because Things Fall Apart is a novel, it cannot be used to source facts. For example:
  • In ref #112 it is used to source a fact about clothing.
  • Ref #114, again, clothing, accessories, etc.

I have used another source. Ukabia (talk) 02:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

• I am also concerned about the use of the book "Understanding Things Fall Apart". Google won't let me see the page(s) that you are using in Refs 15 and 23. Is the information you're taking gleaned direction from Things Fall Apart and simply passed through this new book, or are they facts that were researched by the author of Understanding...?

I have fixed the links. The book talks about the context of the novel and talks about some of the history of the Igbo people including a timeline of Igbo history. Ukabia (talk) 01:55, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Let me know on these last couple of things, and the article will be good to go for GA status. Dana boomer (talk) 01:34, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Allright, everything looks good with the article, so I am going to pass it to GA status. Very nice work and thank you for all of your prompt responses. Dana boomer (talk) 02:28, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem, Thank you very much. Ukabia (talk) 02:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC)