Talk:Prime Minister of Albania/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Yue (talk · contribs) 19:08, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

I will complete this review over the weekend. If I encounter minor issues, particularly those concerning GA Criteria #1, I will be bold and remedy them myself to save both my time and the nominator's. In the comments section of each criteria, I will record suggestions for improving the prose. The original text would not be incorrect per se in terms of grammar or spelling, but the phrase may be awkward or unclear. My words are recorded in italics. Yue🌙 19:08, 20 January 2024 (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):

   In general: The article is generally well-written with minor instances of grammatical mistakes, awkward phrasing, and run-on sentences. These were, for the most part, easily remedied.

   Suggestions:

   • (Lead) "Since that time, the nation has navigated a dynamic political evolution spanning distinct periods ... and the eventual democratic order." → "The nation has since navigated a dynamic political evolution spanning distinct periods ... and the present democratic order."
   • (Lead) "... that marked a notable shift ..." in what?
   • (Lead) What do you mean by "integral policies"? The phrases makes sense grammatically, but the use of 'integral' as an adjective in this context is not common in English.
   • (History → 1991–present) "On 4 June 1991, Nano resigned from office due to political and social pressure ... from whom / for what reason(s)? (who / why?)
   • (History → 1991–present) "... outbreak of the Albanian Civil War in 1997 ..." → "... outbreak of the 1997 Albanian civil unrest ..." A quick glance at Talk:1997 Albanian civil unrest indicates that there is disagreement on the label 'civil war'. I suggest sticking to the article's current name and, if desired, proposing a change in nomenclature at Talk:1997 Albanian civil unrest.
   • (Functions) "This ensures the efficient operation of the framework of the government ... and an overall contribution to the efficient administration of government functions." The latter statement sounds like it was already covered by the former statement. Am I missing something here?
   • (Functions) "This motion cannot involve investigations, appointments, immunity or parliamentary functioning." As in the parliament functioning or parliamentary functions?
   • (Functions) "Importantly, a motion of confidence cannot be proposed during the consideration of a motion of no confidence." Is there a difference between the two in Albanian parliamentary politics? If not, did you mean another motion of confidence?

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   In general: I only found one instance of failed verification, or, at least, the link given did not clearly and explicitly back up the statement being verified. The statement made the largely-accepted claim that Enver Hoxha was committed to Marxism–Leninism; to remedy this issue, I simply had to find a source that explicitly stated this, and I did.

   It seems questionable to use the OSCE's profile of Edi Rama chairpersonship to help verify a claim characterising Rama's achievements. Obviously the OSCE would not criticise its own chair; perhaps other secondary sources highlight the same successes of Rama's tenure as prime minister?

   Some readers may also take issue with the citations of primary sources from Socialist Albania or US-government and US-government-funded sources (e.g. Freedom House, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty) whose titles and content make value statements. However, none of them are being cited to verify value statements, nor controversial or contentious statements. In fact, most of them appear to be supplementary and their inclusion or removal would not affect the verifiability of the article in any meaningful way. However ...

   Suggestions: I recommend alternate secondary sources for citations 14, 39, 42, 48, 51, 53 or 63. I do not think their inclusion is problematic per se as, again, they are not being cited to verify disputed claims, but there are likely better sources for the objective claims they are being cited for. I.e. it shouldn't be a problem, but in the future some editors may make it a problem, so it's best to avoid the trouble altogether.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   In general: The article reasonably covers the scope of its subject without extraneous detail or going off-topic. Readers will finish the article with a general understanding of the history and functions of the office of Prime Minister of Albania. The article is, however, vague at times.

   Suggestions: Some sentences would benefit from expansion and clarification, as at present they are too general and vague. This is particularly an issue in the "History" section, aside from the first paragraph of the "1912–1990" subsection, which does a decent job of including a few sentences which explain certain claims, for example:

   • "Subsequently, during their respective tenures as prime ministers from 1914 to 1920, Turhan Përmeti and Esad Toptani were instrumental in directing Albania through the challenges of World War I. This period was marked by their dedication to preserving the country's independence in the face of shifting alliances and external interventions."
   • "Similarly, the emergence of Ilias Vrioni as prime minister in 1920 occurred in the aftermath of World War I, and Vrioni addressed border disputes with the backing of several major Western nations that guaranteed Albania's sovereignty within the boundaries formed in 1913."
   • "In 1924, Fan Noli's brief tenure saw the introduction of sweeping reforms, including initiatives in education and land distribution aimed at reshaping the socio-economic landscape, alongside the establishment of the Albanian Orthodox Church."

   These sentences need expansion:

   • "Prime Ministers of the era, including Shefqet Vërlaci and Mustafa Merlika-Kruja, assumed significant roles in navigating the challenges posed by foreign occupation." ... challenges such as?
   • "He played an essential part in implementing the government's policies and exerting influence over the country's direction." ... notable examples?
   • "Nano resigned from office due to political and social pressure, allowing Ylli Bufi and Vilson Ahmeti to assume the mantle for a short period, respectively." ... Why did he receive pressure?

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   In general: The article does not use weighted language and, when speaking to specific prime ministerial tenures, it includes both achievements and pitfalls, praise and criticism.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   In general: The article's stability is not under threat.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

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

   In general: It is evident that the nominator took great care in including images which are on-topic, suitably-captioned, and appropriately-licensed. The list of prime ministers, in the form of a table, is excellently formatted.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Preliminary review: In general, the article is well-written, broad but focused, well-formatted, and sufficiently referenced. Some sentences are awkwardly worded or fragmented, and consequently their meanings are unclear, but this can easily be remedied with input from the nominator. A few sources cited may appear, but not actually be, impartial due to the wording of their title and content. I recommend citing alternative secondary sources to quell any doubt as to the legitimacy of the claims being verified, as the statements being cited for are mostly uncontroversial.

   @Iaof2017: As the nominator, please review my comments and suggestions and share your input, including any disagreements with my evaluation. I will respond as quickly as possible. Yue🌙 00:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

   Hey Yue thank you for the detailed review. I appreciate your insights. I'll begin working on it in the next 48 hours as I'm currently dealing with some private stuff. Cheers! Iaof2017 (talk) 11:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

   Final comments: @Iaof2017: I am failing this nomination due to the absence of a timely response from the nominator. I gave the unusual benefit of a three-week extension due to your comment about private matters. However, you are evidently preoccupied with other important matters, so the timing of my review was perhaps unfortunate. I highly recommend you renominate this article for GA status after reviewing the comments I made and making improvements the article. Yue🌙 04:33, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.