Talk:National Rally/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Lemurbaby (talk • message • contribs • count • logs • email) 11:49, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

• Please fix the following disambiguation links: 20 Minutes, Anti-Islamism, Law and order, New World Order, Vitrolles  Done
• In a few words, briefly explain what the Restauration Nationale is (to provide a tiny bit of context for those who don't know).  Done
• "However, an increased requirements on support by elected officials had been introduced for the election, which left both Le Pen and Gauchon unable to stand for the election." - I tweaked this sentence, but it's still a bit difficult to understand if the reader is not familiar with the notion that in France, a candidate needs to have the support of a certain number of elected officials. It would be good to reword it further. Lemurbaby (talk) 11:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)  Done
• "the left-wing vote was scattered among exceptionally many leftist parties" - this reads a little unnaturally. It would be good to find another way to say this. Lemurbaby (talk) 11:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)  Done
  • Instead; "Jospin had also been weakened due to the competition between an exceptional number of leftist parties." – Bellatores (t.) 23:37, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

1. B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

• Use en dash (–), not a regular dash (-) for number ranges (years, pages etc). Lemurbaby (talk) 11:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)  Done
  • Found one error and corrected it. – Bellatores (t.) 11:17, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

• Citations are needed to support all statistics in the article (for example, in infobox for the number of FN seats, and in the election results section). Lemurbaby (talk) 11:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)  Done
  • I have sourced all election results; the sources differ somewhat on some figures though, but nothing significant. – Bellatores (t.) 23:00, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
• I would encourage you to include archived urls for your citations, so future readers will be ensured the option of accessing the sources you used for further information. Lemurbaby (talk) 11:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

1. C. No original research:

2. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

3. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

4. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

5. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

• The images "200109 Jean-Marie Le Pen 191.jpg" and "200109 Présidentielles 2002 122.jpg" require the verified approval of the creators of the works. Lemurbaby (talk) 11:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
  • You have to explain this point further, including what you think should be done. – Bellatores (t.) 23:12, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

1. B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

2. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comments

• I will be reviewing this article over the next several days. Lemurbaby (talk) 11:49, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
• Congratulations on a beautifully written and well-researched article. I will be happy to award GA once the above issues have been addressed, and I hope you'll be willing to see this through the FA process as well - it should pass easily. Lemurbaby (talk) 11:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)