Talk:Poedjangga Baroe

Copyedit and question

Alright, I've finished my copyedit of the article, I thought it was in good shape, I saw few real mistakes. I mostly tried to tighten up the prose, my apologies if I overreached at all. These are my changes, you might want to check on any wikilinks I introduced. I noticed a number of the critics listed aren't linked, I assume they are fairly minor figures without articles? One issue that I thought I'd bring up:

• "However, the aesthetic qualities of works published in Poedjangga Baroe have received mixed reception in the years after the magazine stopped publication. Indonesian poet and literary critic Mohamad Balfas argued in 1976 that most poetry published in Poedjangga Baroe suffered from over-sentimentality and rhetoric, which he blamed on their influences." A couple questions here: who does "their" refer to? And what does it mean that the "most poetry... suffered from... rhetoric"? Other than that, I think the article is pretty understandable and well written, good job. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:53, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

• Indonesiaphiles are very poorly represented on the encyclopedia. Half my course material quoted Teeuw and we had to memorize Siregar's views on Indonesian literature (note that Siregar and Teeuw are both cited in the Sutherland article as well), so they could have an article at some time. I don't think you changed the meaning in your copyedit. I'll deal with that one paragraph. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:06, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Balfas probably deserves an article too (he has one on the Indonesian Wikipedia). Modified the paragraph Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:09, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 19:24, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I will review this article. At first glance it meets the GA criteria.

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Lead:

   "as well as requests to ten sultanates for support" - I think we can leave out "requests", but I am not sure...

   Background:

   Suggest linking of "feudal"

   'Publication

   Might want to eliminate "published" in "In the prospectus for the soon-to-be published Poedjangga Baroe," to avoid repetition

   Politics

   "Marxist", "fascism", "sonnet" should be linked imho

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Book 1 needs language parameter

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: Just few minor fixes.

   Pass/Fail:

• Thanks for giving this article a look. I've fixed what you've indicated (well, I haven't been accused of overlinking in a while.) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I am passing this interesting article as it clearly meets the GA criteria, if not the FA criteria. Regards and great work on Indonesia-related articles! :)--GoP_T^C_N 08:07, 12 June 2012 (UTC)