Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sarawak/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 01:37, 31 December 2016 [1].

Sarawak

edit
Nominator(s): Cerevisae (talk) 11:19, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Sarawak, the largest state in Malaysia in terms of land area, one of the largest timber exporter in the world, famous for its natural wonders such as Mulu caves and rainforest biodiversity. Sarawak is located on the island of Borneo. This article has been checked against the Good Article criteria and all the references are uniform. The lead has a concise summary. The article has also been checked against grammatical errors during the good article nomination. Any suggestions to improve this article to FA status is welcomed.Cerevisae (talk) 11:19, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comment: A quick skim of the lead shows that the word "state" crops up an awful lot, and we really need to use some different words! Also, quite a few sentences begin with "The", which is best avoided, and "Earliest human settlements in Sarawak date back to 40,000 years ago at the Niah Caves" feels like it should begin with "the" as well. Sarastro1 (talk) 00:04, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • File:Coat_of_arms_of_Sarawak.svg: what is the copyright status of the original work? - Done Cerevisae (talk) 16:37, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Sarawak_1888-97_Sc13.jpg: what author death date are we using to get that tag? - Author is unknown. According to PD Malaysia, it can be counted from the publication date of the stamp. Cerevisae (talk) 23:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Batu_Lintang_POW_camp,_Sarawak,_Borneo_taken_on_or_after_29_August_1945.jpg: per the tag, when/where was this first published? same with File:The_unconditional_surrender_ceremony_of_the_Japanese_to_the_Autralian_forces_in_Kuching,_Sarawak.jpg - First publication dates of both images not stated at Australian war memorial. But according to PD Australia, both images can be counted from the date they were first taken. Cerevisae (talk) 23:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Sarawak_anti-cession_demonstration.JPG: source link is dead, and which of the given rationales applies? - "For anonymous or pseudonymous works copyright subsists for 50 years after publication unless the author is made known." Cerevisae (talk) 00:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Sarawak_during_the_formation_of_Malaysia_(16_September_1963).jpg: given the date, what is the status of this work in the US? Same with File:Malaysian_Rangers,_Malay-Thai_border_(AWM_MAL-65-0046-01).JPG - Done Cerevisae (talk) 00:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Timeline_of_evolution_of_political_parties_in_Sarawak.svg should include a data source. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:56, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

-Done Cerevisae (talk) 01:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on reference style The point of having "retrieved on" dates is that if the link goes dead, the reader can go find an archived copy from that date. But since you include the archive links here, there's no need to include "retrieved on" dates; they just bloat up the references which have two other dates too.—indopug (talk) 07:23, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm, I'm not so sure if we should remove the accessdate parameters entirely. The archiveurl and archivedate parameters are often edited by bots and they use the accessdate as the reference for finding the archived version. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 03:05, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for reminding. However, I have removed all the accessdate parameters for references which have the archive links. I do not remove accessdate parameters for those without archive links. If you felt that it is inappropriate, feel free to restore them. Cheers. Cerevisae (talk) 03:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • The reason why I insist on having the accessdate parameters is because it helps in case we have to switch to a different archive in the future. I remember when the archive.is was blacklisted, a lot of editors removed the archiveurl and archivedate parameters entirely. Luckily the accessdate was still there, so a bot could then restore the archives from a different service. Considering situations like these, I feel it is useful to keep them. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 03:27, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This seems overly cautious to me. Note that WP:CITEREF states that, even without considering the archive links, the accessdate is only "required if the publication date is unknown". So it's actually doubly redundant in the triple-date cases I'm talking about.—indopug (talk) 17:45, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Dudley

  • Infobox
  • 'Division' could be linked to Divisions of Malaysia. - Done
  • 'Head of State' would be clearer for non-expert readers than 'Yang Di-Pertua Negeri'. -Done
  • There is no ref for HDI - Used the 2000 data. 2010 data not found.
  • (11th) would generally be taken as 11th in the world, but it links to States and federal territories of Malaysia, so presumably means 11th in Malaysia. This is misleading and better omitted. -Done.
  • The infobox is too long. I would leave out the section on Postal Code, Calling Code and Vehicle Registration. -Done. Shortened the three sections.
  • The note at the end of the infobox also adds to its length. It would be better as a reference at the end. - Shortened the paragraph.
  • "surrounding the independent state of Brunei." Only the land border. This is misleading. - Changed to bordering the independent state of Brunei.
  • "total population of this region is 2,636,000" This is unclear. It would be better to say "of Sarawak". - Done.
  • "Trading relationship with China lasted from 8th to 13th century AD." This is ungrammatical and too general. Chinese ceramics from one dig do not indicate a trading relationship between Sarawak and China. It may indicate that Santubong was trading with China, but it could also be the profits of piracy or the result of indirect acquisition if Santobong acquired the ceramics from a trading partner which in turn obtained them from China. - Changed to "A series of Chinese ceramics dated from 8th to 13th century AD was uncovered at the archeological site of Santubong." Cerevisae (talk) 08:37, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It came under the influence of the Bruneian Empire in the 16th century." What does "It" mean here? According to the text below, it was only Kunching which was under the influence of Brunei in the 16the century, and Sarawak as a whole did not come under their control until the 19th. - Done. Changed to coastal regions of Sarawak Cerevisae (talk) 08:37, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "During World War II, it was occupied by the Japanese for three years before being ceded as a British Crown Colony in 1946." This wrongly implies that the Japanese ceded it to the British. - Done. Changed to "After the war, the Brooke family ceded Sarawak as British Crown Colony in 1946." Cerevisae (talk) 08:37, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "From 1960 to 1990, this region also experienced the communist insurgency." I would avoid the word "region" as unclear (except when referring to the regions of Sarawak). In this case does it mean Sarawak only or Sarawak and Sabah? - Done. Changed to "Sarawak". Cerevisae (talk) 08:37, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • More to follow. Dudley Miles (talk) 15:50, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Gawai Dayak festival is only celebrated in Sarawak. The traditional musical instrument, sapeh, is well known in Sarawak." The article on Gawai Dayak says that it is also celebrated in Indonesia. Perhaps "The Gawai Dayak is an annual festival celebrated on a public holiday, and the sapeh is a traditional musical instrument." - Done Cerevisae (talk) 18:28, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A Manis paleojavanica (Asian giant pangolin) bone that had not developed into a fossil, dated to 30,000 BC, was found nearby [29] as well as in the Mesolithic and Neolithic burial sites inside the Niah Caves." I do not think this is important enough to be worth mentioning. Countless bones and fossil must have been found. Also the grammar has been wrong as you are saying that one bone was found in several different caves. - Done Cerevisae (talk) 18:28, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why was Pangeran Muda Hashim able to surrender Sarawak to Brooke when he was merely the Sultan's representative? - Pangeran have to honour a treaty signed by him and James Brooke. James Brooke appointment was later accepted by the Sultan of Brunei by the use of force.Cerevisae (talk) 00:44, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have made some copy edits. Tell me if you prefer me to stick to commenting. Dudley Miles (talk) 15:05, 20 November 2016 (UTC) - You are welcome to do copyedits on this article. Thanks a lot. Cerevisae (talk) 18:28, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further comments.
  • "installed Pangeran Muda Hashim into the Brunei Court" I do not understand this. Installed as what and how did he have the righ to install someone in the Brunei court? - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 00:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and his mining rights" What mining rights? You have not mentioned any. - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 00:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Both James and Charles Brooke" Which Charles Brooke. - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 00:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "However, in the Malaysian context, Brooke is viewed as a colonialist." This does not sound quite right. Maybe "However, Brooke is viewed by Malaysians as a colonist." - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 00:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The dynasty adopted the policy of paternalism to protect the interests of the indigenous population and their overall welfare." This is tendentious. You should make clear that this is how they saw themselves rather than being an impartial verdict. - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 00:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note 49. This states what is said in the main text in the source's own words, which adds unnecessarily to the length of the article, and could be deleted. This comment probably applies to other notes. Also, part of the note relates to the 1950s, and should be a separate footnote. - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 00:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would suggest you consider having separate sections for notes and citations. It is not a requirement, but I think it would help readers. - In process... Cerevisae (talk) 00:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "However, the draft constitution contained irregularities," What is meant by "irregularities" here? It does not seem the right word. -Done. Removed the "irregularities". Cerevisae (talk) 03:22, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I hesitate to say so as the article is already excessively long, but a couple of sentences on the history between 1891 and 1941 would be helpful. -Done. Cerevisae (talk) 03:27, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Besides, Vyner Brooke's wife, Sylvia Brett, also tried to discredit Anthony Brooke while trying to install her own daughter to the throne." This reads rather oddly, but I am not sure how to amend it. - Done. "Vyner Brooke's wife, Sylvia Brett, tried to defame Anthony Brooke while attempting to install her own daughter to the throne."Cerevisae (talk) 03:22, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • More to follow. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:01, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further comments
  • " the Council Negri" Negri is not explained. - It is the Sarawak state legislative assembly. Cerevisae (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sarawak drafted an 18-point agreement" A country cannot draft. Also I think the alternative name of 18-point memorandum is better. - Done Cerevisae (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Clandestine Communist Organisation". You do not explain that this was a Sarawak group. Also the article on the CCO states that it was formed in 1971, and in the 1960s the group operated as the Sarawak People's Guerrillas. Is this incorrect? - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC) Changed the name to SLL because SLL is the most prominent group existed before NKCP in 1970. Cerevisae (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Kalimantan" I suggest adding "(Indonesian Borneo)". - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the Sarawak government started to establish New Villages along the Kuching–Serian road to prevent the community from helping the communists." This is unclear. What community and how did the villages prevent help to the communists? Also New Villages should not be capitalised. - Done. "security-guarded settlements" as clarification. Cerevisae (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The head of the Sarawak state is the Yang di-Pertua Negeri (also known as TYT or State Governor), a position which is largely symbolic, appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (king) of Malaysia." Does the king act on the advice of the Malaysian government? If so, you should say so. - Done Cerevisae (talk) 15:36, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sarawak has been the political stronghold of the ruling Alliance Party" the stronghold implies tha main stronghold, and it would be helpful to specify that it is a Malaysia wide party. I suggest "Sarawak has been a stronghold of the Alliance Party, the ruling party in Malaysia" - Done Cerevisae (talk) 14:18, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found the last three paragraphs of 'Government' confusing. First you give an account of politics up to 1987 that it is so telescoped that it is unclear what you are talking about. Then you go back to 1970, and in the last paragraph you say that parties in the BN coalition have not been active, even though you say above that the BN is dominant in Sarawak. - Done. Rearranged the sentences into chronological order. Clarified that only the locally-based BN component parties is active in Sarawak politics. Cerevisae (talk) 12:10, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • More to follow. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:46, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The 39 local governments in Sarawak" This sounds a bit odd. I would say 39 districts. Agreed. Cerevisae (talk) 14:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The regiment had helped the Brookes to pacify the state, and taken part in guerilla warfare against the Japanese, in the Malayan Emergency and the Sarawak Communist Insurgency against the communists." This sentence is confusing. A country is pacified, not a state, and you appear to say that the regiment took part in guerrills warfare during the Malayan Emergency. Also this is the first and only time you mention the Malayan Emergency. The link says it was a communist uprising between 1948 and 1960, but this is not mentioned in the history section above, where you jump from the end of the secessionist movement of the 1940s to self-government in the 1960s. - Malayan emergency only happens in West Malaysia, it has nothing to do with Sarawak except that Sarawak had sent some Rangers there to fight the communists in West Malaysia. Basically, Malaysia had two separate communist insurgencies. Cerevisae (talk) 14:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 1888 Sarawak, together with neighbouring North Borneo, and Brunei, became British protectorates," In the history section above you said that it was independent until 1946. added another sentence at the end of first paragraph of "Brooke Dynasty" clarify that it was a British protectorate until 1946. Cerevisae (talk) 14:21, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi claimed that Brunei had dropped its claim over Limbang."You have not said that Brunei made such a claim. -Done. Cerevisae (talk) 11:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sarawak is generally divided into three ecoregions." generally? -Removed "Generally" Cerevisae (talk) 11:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The third region is the mountainous region along the Kalimantan–Borneo border and with the Kelabit (Bario), Murut (Ba'kelalan) and Kenyah (Usun Apau Plieran) highlands in the north." What does "with" mean here? - Done. Restructured the sentence. Cerevisae (talk) 11:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Lothosols and lithosols make up 60 percent of the land, while podsols accounts for 12 percent of the Sarawak land area." Very few readers will understand this, and there is not even an article on lothosols. I would suggest spelling out the meaning or deleting. - Deleted the lothosols Cerevisae (talk) 11:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Total exports as a percentage of GDP was more than 100 percent in 2013 while total trade exceeds 130 percent." How can exports be more than GDP? - Deleted Cerevisae (talk) 11:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sarawak is also one of the world's largest exporters of tropical hardwood timber, constituted 65 percent of total Malaysian log exports in 2000."The grammar has gone wrong here. - Changed the sentence Cerevisae (talk) 11:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Income inequality in Sarawak has not shown any significant changes from 1980 to 2009, with the Gini coefficient fluctuating between 0.4 and 0.5." This is not very helpful. How unequal are incomes compared with the rest of Malaysia and internationally? - added Malaysian Gini coefficient. Cerevisae (talk) 11:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • More to follow. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:58, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 2008, plans are for Samalaju to be developed as an industrial park" Ungrammatical and not sure what you are saying - sounds as if written before 2008. - Rewrote the sentence. Cerevisae (talk) 12:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Sarawak capital of Kuching has been mentioned as one of the retirement destinations in Malaysia" This is vague and unencyclopedic. - Rewrote Cerevisae (talk) 12:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Computer usage was 45.9 percent in the same year" What does this mean? Percentage of people or households and is it of people owning a computer or with access to oen? - Deleted. Cerevisae (talk) 12:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "However, in that the road condition is presently unsatisfactory, due to danger spots, sharp bends, blind spots, potholes, and erosion found along the road," This is ungrammatical. - Simplified the sentence. Cerevisae (talk) 12:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sarawak has a considerable number of indigenous students enrolled in Chinese schools." You may explain what indigenous means in this context later in the article, but I think the term is better avoided at this point. - changed "indigenous" to "bumiputera". Cerevisae (talk) 12:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • " it has the lowest population density in Malaysia, which stands at 20 people per km2" I assume you mean 20 in Sarawak, but it is ambiguous. - added "in Sarawak" Cerevisae (talk) 12:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • " In the past, the Ibans recognised status hierarchy such as raja berani (the rich and the brave), orang mayuh (ordinary people), and ulun (slaves). However, during the Brooke era, Iban society was restructured into formal offices such as tuai rumah (headman), penghulu (regional chief), and temenggong (paramount chief)." This is not logical. The first part is different classes, but you contrast it with different names for leaders. - Deleted the second part of the sentence. Cerevisae (talk) 12:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "They traditionally live in tall houses, but after adopting a Malay lifestyle, they dwell in villages." Another illogical contrast. - Deleted the second part. Cerevisae (talk) 12:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • " to make Yang di-Pertuan Agong as the head of Islam in Sarawak" This is ungrammatical and I am not sure what it means. If Yang di-Pertuan Agong is an office, it should be the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 12:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • A very full account, but excessively detailed. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:31, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Lemongirl942
The lead could use a bit of trimming. For example

  • Following this, it became one of the founding members of the Federation of Malaysia (established on 16 September 1963) alongside North Borneo (now Sabah), Singapore (expelled in 1965), and the Federation of Malaya (Peninsular Malaysia or West Malaysia). could be changed to "Following this, it became one of the founding members of the Federation of Malaysia, established on 16 September 1963". (The rest of the information could be kept in the body of the article) - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 08:37, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sarawak State Museum is the oldest museum in Borneo. The traditional musical instrument, sapeh, is well known in Sarawak. The Rainforest World Music Festival (RWMF) is one of the premier music events in Malaysia. The Gawai Dayak festival is only celebrated in Sarawak. This could do with a bit of adjustment. For example, considering due weight, the RWMF and the museum is better placed in the body. - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 08:37, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It would help to add some information about the major ethnic groups in the lead. That seems to be an important part of Sarawak - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 08:37, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Add more later. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 03:15, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • "nicknamed Bumi Kenyalang ("Land of the Hornbills")," seems to be better placed in the etymology section, rather than the lead. I wasn't able to find information about why it is called so. In general, epithets/nicknames are best covered in the etymology section. - Done. Cerevisae (talk) 22:30, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Edwininlondon

An in-depth piece. I'm not a native speaker, so please forgive me if what I question below is actually fine.

More later. Edwininlondon (talk) 19:11, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edwininlondon (talk) 14:34, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A bit more:

And a bit more:

And still more:

  • around 39 districts -> why not the exact number? - Done
  • Division and District -> why capitals? - Done
  • For each district, ... for each village -> could benefit from a rewrite -Done
  • In 1888 Sarawak -> inconsistent across article, usually you have "In xxxx, " - Done
  • stating the issue was never been discussed during the meeting -> grammar + which meeting? do we need "during the meeting" at all? - Done
  • It contains large tracts of tropical rainforest with abundant plant and animal species. -> seems out of place. Better placed in the eco paragraph - Done
  • are the examples that are located -> sounds a bit odd to my foreign ears - Done
  • when does the the southwest monsoon occur? - Done (It occurs between March to October) Cerevisae (talk) 13:37, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "times. While the youngest " --> times, while the youngest Edwininlondon (talk) 19:01, 18 December 2016 (UTC) - Done Cerevisae (talk) 13:37, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chipmunkdavis

edit

The language section doesn't make sense. It notes English being official then Malay being adopted, and then notes that English was re-adopted with no context as to why/when it was dropped. CMD (talk) 14:17, 20 December 2016 (UTC) - Done. Clarified with more sources. Cerevisae (talk) 23:27, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article has 70kB of prose, quite above our 50kB guideline. There are also a few single-paragraph subsections, which are discouraged by WP:MOSBODY. In particular the ethnic group section could be tweaked. I am unsure if giving each of these groups their own section is warranted within the summarystyle of this article. At any rate, the pictures don't currently match up well. Perhaps they could be organised in a 2x3 grid or similar. CMD (talk) 01:43, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you CMD, you are welcome to remove the details that are deemed unnecessary away from the article. Thanks. :-) Cerevisae (talk) 05:06, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I figure I may as well put some effort in given I would like this to be an FA as well.
There are some sourcing presentation issues. Haven't looked through them all thoroughly, but I noticed when looking at the self-government sources that none have page numbers. They don't seem to have a google books preview, so I can't go inside them myself. CMD (talk) 11:46, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment

edit

Hi, we've had a great deal of commentary here but no clear support for promotion to FA after six weeks, so I'm going to archive this and ask that the nominator take care of any outstanding comments outside the pressure of the FAC process and consider giving this a fresh nomination here after the usual two-week break following an archived nom. Prior to that it may be worthwhile re-listing at Peer Review, pinging the reviewers above, given the last PR garnered no commentary -- that would be one way to try and nail down any issues before re-nominating at FAC (you can also ping prior reviewers with neurally worded notices when you re-nom here). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:36, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Sarawak/archive1&oldid=757656721"