Wikipedia

Talk:Jean-Joseph Rabearivelo/GA1

< Talk:Jean-Joseph Rabearivelo
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Quadell in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago33 comments2 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Quadell (talk · contribs) 18:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)Reply
Nominator: Lemurbaby

I will study this article carefully, and I hope to have the review complete by the end of the week. Regarding my reviewing style, issues I identify below will be prepended by the number of the relevant GA criterion. As they are resolved, I will cross out the issue number. Comments that are not actionable requirements are not prepended. – Quadell (talk) 18:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

  • The prose is generally clear and engaging throughout. The lead is a fair summary of the entire article, conforming well to WP:MOSLEAD. Since these can be the hardest parts of writing a "Good Article", my hat's off to you.
  • 6a I can't find any evidence that the photographer of File:Jean-Joseph Rabearivelo.jpg died more than 70 years ago. Due to the URAA mess, we would have to show either that the image was first published before 1923, or that the author died before 1926, in order to show that its copyright has expired. (This seems to be one of those frustrating cases where everyone uses the same image and everyone assumes it's free, but no one can provide any solid information about its providence that would verify this.  )
  • You're right - the photo was part of the original article before I began rewriting it (the entire thing had been plagiarized from a book), and after searching I can't find info about this or any photo of him. I'll have to change the copyright info to fair use. I'll come back to this shortly. Lemurbaby (talk) 12:28, 20 September 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • 1b Related to the above, I suppose it would be marginally useful to link to National Library of Madagascar both in the lead and in the "Legacy" section, although it's the barest of stubs. Still, one article at a time, right?
  • 1a Some sentences in the article use the serial comma, while others do not. MOS:SERIAL tells us "Editors may use either convention on Wikipedia so long as each article is consistent within itself." I like the serial comma personally, but you're free to either always include or always omit it. Here are some examples:
    • Serial comma: "the death of his young daughter, the French authority's decision to drop him from the list of exhibitors at the World Exhibition in Paris, and a growing debt"
    • No serial comma: "the privileges, prestige and wealth"
    • Serial comma: "a lace designer, an errand boy, and a secretary"
    • No serial comma: "learning English, Spanish and Hebrew" (etc.)
  • 1a The lead states "Rabearivelo committed suicide by cyanide poisoning in 1937, fostering an image of Rabearivelo as a colonial martyr." Repeating the name seems a little clunky, and I'm not sure "fostering" is the right verb to use here. What would you think of "Rabearivelo committed suicide by cyanide poisoning in 1937, leading to the impression that he was a colonial martyr" or "...contributing to his image as a colonial martyr"?
  • 2a I love how meticulously sourced everything is, but the very first sentence outside the lead plays a bit of "citation tennis", batting from 1 to 2 and back several times. Since nothing there is contentious (except for the exact date), I would recommend having [1][2] at the end of the sentence. I think that's less visually distracting.
  • 1a The first part of the "Childhood" section links to Kingdom of Imerina with the words "former monarchy". But later, Imerina is mentioned, and the reader doesn't know what it means. I would recommend wording it "...to which they had been entitled under the former monarchy, the Kingdom of Imerina." (As an alternate solution, you could decline to link "former monarchy" at all, and just link "Imerina" the first time it is mentioned.)
  • 1a Using the word "reportedly" seems like a hedge in "He was also reportedly reluctant to become religiously observant." The source flatly states that he was expelled "for refusing to join the religious order". Unless there is a reason to doubt this, I would simply add this reason to the list of reasons for his expulsion ("lack of discipline and poor academic performance").
  • 1a The article states "He ended his studies at Ecole Flacourt in 1915 at the age of 13." If that is true, then he could not have been born in 1903. Since his birth year is listed as uncertain, we should not be certain about his age at specific years.
  • 1a The first paragraph of "Early period" ends with "...including Pierre Camo in 1921 - Madagascar's postal magistrate and founder of the literary magazine 18° Latitude Sud - and Robert Boudry, the colony's financial manager." I can see why you used dashes, but in my opinion this would be comprehensible without dashes if the names were reversed, as: "...including Robert Boudry, Madagascar's financial manager, and Pierre Camo, the colony's postal magistrate and founder of the literary magazine 18° Latitude Sud." If you choose to keep the dashes, then you should either use em dashes or spaces en dashes, as per WP:MOSDASH.
  • 1a "In it he honored Rainandriamampandry, then-governor of Toamasina who was executed by the French in 1896..." feels a little clunky. (I'm not sure when "then" is, and it feels like a comma may be needed.) How about wording it as: "In it he honored Rainandriamampandry, the former governor of Toamasina who was executed by the French in 1896..."?
  • 4 "Hedonist" seems like a value judgment (though I see the source calls him an "Épicurien"), and I doubt he was an "ethical hedonist" like the Hedonism link mainly discusses. What would you think of wording that sentence and the next this way? "He was also a womanizer, pursuing relationships with a wide variety of women throughout his adult life, and he abused alcohol and opium, becoming addicted while still in his twenties." I think that ties the facts in better with the sentences that precede and follow. What do you think?
  • 1a There's no need for a comma after "in an emerging literary movement"
  • 1b In "he then took 14 .25-gram quinine capsules", it is usually better to spell out "fourteen", per WP:MOSNUM, and this is a case where it would be clearer to do so. Also, either "0.25-gram" or "250-miligram" would be clearer.
  • 1b I don't think the critic's phrase "alienating modernity" refers to Modernism, the artistic movement. I believe it refers to the alienating experience of living in the modern world. So I don't think it should link to Modernism.
  • Done
  • 1b It seems Négritude should have an accent? Also, Négritude should be linked at the first mention (in "Legacy"), not the second.
  • 1b The {{Persondata}} box gives his birth year as 1901, though the article gives it as either 1901 or 1903.
  • 2b I have done some spotchecks on various sources, and I have usually found the statements fully sourced (and never with any plagiarism). But there is a strong claim I wanted to double-check: The article states that "Rabearivelo has been recognized by the Government of Madagascar and art critics as the greatest literary figure in Madagascar", and this is sourced to Riffard's biography. I don't speak French, and Google Translate is always dodgy with these things, but I can't find that claim supported in the source. Since it's one of the bases for similar strong claims in the first sentence of the lead, I want to make sure it's solidly sourced. Does Riffard fully support this? If not, are there other sources that could strengthen this?
  • 2a This is a better source for the online text of Rabearivelo (2007) than the link given in the references.
  • 2a Is this the same book as the Auzias and Labourdette text in the article? (It has the same ISBN, and page 142 still seems to be about Rabearivelo and Rajaonarison... but the title mentions "2008-2009" rather than just "2008")
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. Very good. All issues resolved.
  1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. All issues resolved.
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. All issues resolved.
  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). Very well referenced.
  2c. it contains no original research. No problems.
3. Broad in its coverage:
  3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. It covers every major aspect of the topic. In fact, it may be the most thorough and neutral English-language biography of Rabearivelo.
  3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). No problems.
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. No problems.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. No problems.
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. All issues resolved.
  6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. No problems.
  7. Overall assessment. This excellent article is a fascinating read. I am delighted to elevating this article to GA status.
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jean-Joseph_Rabearivelo/GA1&oldid=967078485"