Talk:Msambweni

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Msambweni/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: 7&6=thirteen (talk · contribs) 22:31, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

• ISBN

Checked out citation. Note the following: Carey, William B.; McDevit, Sean C. (20 June 2013). Prevention And Early Intervention. Routledge. p. 136. ISBN 978-1-134-85834-7. is referenced, but that ISBN yields: Chess, Stella, et al. Prevention and early intervention individual differences as risk factors for the mental health of children : a festschrift for Stella Chess and Alexander Thomas. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1994. Print

That's odd, I use google book ref maker.  Done I've added the citation which appears in the world cat.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:42, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

"coloring buxa" Huh?

Yes the source states that it produces buxa which is a type of coloring, the coloring buxa I think clarifies this already. Would you rather I reword it as buxa (a type of coloring)? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:37, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

• Redundancy 2nd and 3rd paragraphs are virtually repeated later. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:31, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Remember that the lead is supposed to summarize the entire article, which is why there's some repetition later on.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:36, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I fixed the formatting and completed the citations. You obviously have found a lot of obscure sources. I've did some minor copy editing, and fixed the wikilinks. The redundant sections in the lead are (IMHO) too long and detailed. I think that we need to drop a footnote that explains "the coloring buxa". Is there a definition somewhere? Where does it come from? What is it? Where is it used? What color is it? What language is this? How is it derived and from what? Is this a technical term? Not in anybody's vocabulary that I know. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:42, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

It's a type of coloring which the locals produce. It's the name of it rather than being a technical term. Isn't this clear? I can't find anything else on it, would you rather I remove the mention of it? In regard to sources, yes, it's only an obscure mix of sources because I literally racked the web to find all I could about it! That's a good thing :-]♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:45, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I've trimmed the lead a bit, if I cut it any further it'll affect the quality.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:48, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Only implicitly. I can't visualize it or analogize it. Is it from beetles, for example? Is it a food coloring? A dye? It is not an ordinary English word, and I trip over it. It also piques my curiosity, and there is no wikipedia article to link to. I'll take a look at the lead. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:49, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Read WP:LEAD for an insight. Presumably it is the name the locals give to a dye. I'll remove mention of the buxa as I can't find anything else on it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:51, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

It's (Buxa coloring) and it has got to be there somewhere. Don't remove it. We will find something. Lead looks good to go. Probably not an English word. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:54, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Bixa orellana looks like a good candidate. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:57, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I can't find any other sources which elaborate so I've removed it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:00, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I put it back with a footnote, link. If you have a source that mentions Buxa coloring it should be put back. Pictures If there was a picture of the Marine Reserve, it would be a good addition. The article seems to have 'covered the waterfront.' Its scope and depth are what I would expect from a GA. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:11, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

• OK fine. Please place the GA checklist here and it can be passed.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:51, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

This article looks in very good shape. I made many small improvements as noted. Including a link to WP:Commons.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

The article is in very good shape. No issues. Very nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:00, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:18, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

GA check

I am working my way through the Good articles listed at Places; having a quick look to see if they still meet the Good article criteria. I have landed on this article. After I've had a quick look, I'll leave a note here indicating if I have concerns or not.

In general, I see the process as this: 1) Give the article a quick look to see if there are obvious issues: maintenance tags, unsourced sections, excessive media, etc, resolving any minor issues as I do so; 2) If I have concerns, open a GAR to see how serious those concerns are, resolving them myself if they are not serious; 3) If during the GAR I feel that there is significant work to be done (more than I can or am willing to do myself), I will put the GAR on hold and notify the main contributors.

My aim and intention is to keep the article listed - I would rather the article was improved and kept listed than the article is delisted. Where a delisting seems likely due to the amount or nature of work needed being greater than I am able or willing to do alone, and the main contributors are unavailable or unable for whatever reason to do the work, then appropriate WikiProjects will be notified at least seven days before a delisting would take place. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 07:45, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Y. Looks OK. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 07:50, 13 May 2014 (UTC)