Talk:2021 North Kosovo crisis/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Eviolite (talk · contribs) 02:45, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this one within the next few days. eviolite (talk) 02:45, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, 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): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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:

---

Though, actually, before I get to anything: @Dege31: per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (events) and given examples I believe the year should go to the start of the article title, so the article would be called "2021 North Kosovo crisis". What do you think? eviolite (talk) 02:49, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I think so too, that's how the article had been originally named before someone changed the format. Dege31 (talk) 11:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Buidhe has since moved the page. And @Dege31: please ignore the talk message you got that this failed; that's just the bot glitching out because of the move. I'll start my review below. eviolite (talk) 21:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

---

Images:

• I am not sure if the banner image is usable in the article. Commons doesn't have any info on the threshold of originality in Kosovo so the symbol on it might be copyrighted. I have asked on Commons.
  • It is usable because the symbol is in the public domain. "Official material and publication of parliamentary, governmental and other organizations with powers of public office" Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• Additionally, having photos of the actual crisis would be helpful, but there might not be any free ones available - I checked Voice of America's coverage but they didn't take photos.
  • I have been unable to find such images. I could try searching for some images on social media which allow compatible licenses and ask for the creator's permission, but I'm not sure if I'll find something like this. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• The colors in the main map are not accessible for colorblind people - I suggest using different colors and also using italics/bold to identify the type of event.
  • I have changed the hues and implemented italics+bold. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Sourcing:

• While the reference formatting may need cleanup that is not required for GA since every source is clearly identifiable.
• Why are UAWire, The Arab Times, and Telegraf reliable? They reference some prominent statements so if possible I would like to see more reliable sources for these.
  • The sources cited to them cover the primary sources, so I don't think there's a problem. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• Tanjug might also be unreliable, but it is only sourcing an image/caption so is not that big of a deal (and as above the image may be copyrighted too.)
  • I have supplanted it with the original report. The image is not copyrighted. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• Otherwise, all sources look reliable.
• Please add inline citations to the end of every sentence with a quote in it; for example in the "Kosovo" subsection you have quotes in three sentences but only a citation after the fourth.
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Prose:

• The prose is nicely non-neutral for a contentious topic like this, and is generally nice to read. I do have some specific comments though:
  • Thank you. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• In footnote [a], I don't think both links to International recognition of Kosovo are necessary.
  • There is only one link to it in the footnote. I think you mean the link in the lead. I have removed that one. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "has acted independently of it until the 2013 Brussels Agreement." Remove "has" and replace "until" with "prior to"
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "freezing the Brussels Agreement" - how so?
  • Cancelled implementation of the mentioned terms. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "2011" is a WP:EASTEREGG link and should be removed in my opinion, or reword the sentence to incorporate the link better. So is "Republic of Kosovo (RKS)" - recommend moving that link somewhere else in that sentence.
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "when it was expected" -> "when it was expected that"
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• Add a comma after "After 14 September 2021"
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "The KS license plates were also declared invalid by the Government of Kosovo which were used by some vehicles in Kosovo," reword this as it is a bit confusing, consider "The Government of Kosovo also invalidated the KS license plates, which were used by some vehicles in Kosovo"
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "The motive of the Kosovan government in the ban had been to mirror the former, similar policy of the Serbian Government by which Republic of Kosovo(RKS) license plates had been banned since Kosovo declared independence, and vehicles with RKS license plates in Serbia had to switch them for temporary Serbian plates. Vehicles with Serbian license plates in Kosovo were supposed to, up to the 30 September 2021 Agreement in Brussels, have their Serbian license plates taken off and switched for Kosovar license plates at a government vehicle registration center." These sentences are a bit confusing and unwieldy, also repeating the previous paragraph. I would recommend shortening and simplifying them, perhaps something like "The Kosovan government's ban mirrored the former Serbian policy to ban RKS license plates. Vehicles with Serbian license plates in Kosovo had to have them replaced with Kosovar plates."
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "costed" -> "cost"
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "On 23 September 2021 the traffic block consisting of vehicles became 3 kilometres long on the Mitrovica–Raška road in Jarinje." Reword this to avoid passive voice ("The block of vehicles on the Mitrovica–Raška road reached 3 kilometres long on 23 September.")
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• Link Serb List (Kosovo)
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• Change "calm" to "nonviolent" to be clearer.
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• Is there any reason to use the word "allegedly"? See MOS:ALLEGED.
  • Yes. The sources describe it that way. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• Similarly, suggest rewording "On 23 September 2021, the Kosovo Police was accused of injuring three people unrelated to the protests, two seriously, who are now in hospital. Kosovo has denied involvement and says that it's "disinformation"." to "On 23 September 2021, it was reported that the Kosovo Police injured three Serbs who were not protesting, two of whom were hospitalized; the Kosovo Police denied involvement."
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• Explain the abbreviation KFOR (also in the infobox)
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "fighter jets and helicopters, and tanks," -> "fighter jets, helicopters, and tanks"
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "Kosovar special police ROSU" I think you can remove ROSU; it's not mentioned in the source and doesn't mean anything to people who don't know what that specifically is.
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "more KFOR presence" - remove "more"
  • Changed to "more KFOR troops". Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• Change the section title "Reactions" to "International reactions" since Kosovo and Serbia reactions are above
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• "has criticised the conduct of Kosovo" - remove "has"
  • Done. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Generally some text could do with a copyedit, but I can that and go through some more minor things after this review.

• I have responded to your comments. Dege31 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Dege31: Thank you. I am satisfied with the changes (and people on Commons seem to think the emblem is simple enough) and have done a minor copyedit - feel free to revert if you think they are not helpful. (I see now that the footnote is a standard template.) Anyway, I am promoting this to GA - great work! eviolite (talk) 04:43, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Dege31:: Placing on hold, see above. eviolite (talk) 21:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)