Wikipedia:Peer review/2000 Taiwanese presidential election/archive1

2000 Taiwanese presidential election

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to know how to improve it to GA status without nominating it yet. In particular I'd like to know what needs work and/or what should be removed.

Thanks, Duonaut^{(talk | contribs)} 02:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Z1720

These comments are after a quick skim of the article:

I am surprised at how short the lede is, and I think it can include more detail.
"and opposed a referendum on independence." needs a citation.
"All of the candidates promised to work towards opening the Three Links, a largely popular measure.[35]" This needs some context for those who do not know what this project is or why it is important to mention.
"tipped the balance to Chen's favor." Needs a citation
Ref 44 should not be in all caps, per MOS:ALLCAPS

Hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 19:12, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: Thanks for your time. I've been working on this article for quite a while and appreciate it.

I will work on the rest shortly (may remove the Three Links thing as I'm not sure the source verifies it) but I do have one comment. "...tipped the balance to Chen's favor" is verified at each factor, i.e. the actions of China favoring him is cited at "last minute saber-rattling by the PRC". Perhaps not the clearest way to do it, though. Would you suggest moving them to the end, or elsewhere, or do nothing and just clarify when I submit to review? Duonaut^{(talk | contribs)} 06:11, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Duonaut: In answer to your question: per WP:V, information on Wikipedia is a summary of what reliable sources say about the subject, and citations tell the reader where to find those source(s). If there is a source that verifies "tipped the balance to Chen's favor.", a citation to that source needs to be placed after the sentence so that the reader can find that information. If the sources cited earlier in the sentence are the ones that verify this statement, then the citation(s) should be moved to the end of the sentence, as it is generally accepted on Wikipedia that citations are to verify the information the precedes it, not the information after it. If you are inferring that information based on other factors, that might be considered original research and thus will probably need to be removed. Z1720 (talk) 00:19, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: all you mentioned should be addressed now. If you'd like to do a once-over you may, otherwise I'll close this in a week or upon your reply. I'd like your thoughts on my expansion of the lede, though. Duonaut^{(talk | contribs)} 23:34, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments about the lede:

In general, citations are not necessary in the lede as this information should be included and cited in the body of the article, per MOS:LEDECITE
"Presidential elections were held in Taiwan on 18 March 2000 to elect the 10th-term President and Vice-President of the Republic of China under the 1947 Constitution." Maybe "Presidential elections were held in Taiwan on 18 March 2000 to elect the president and vice-president of the Republic of China." I don't think the term number is necessary, though that'll be up to you. Per MOS:JOBTITLE president and vp shouldn't be capitalised.
"This election put an end to more than half a century of uninterrupted Kuomintang (KMT) rule on the island, having ruled as a one-party state" -> This election ended more than half a century of Kuomintang (KMT) rule on the island, of which it governed as a one-party state..."
The lede should include more information about the results: which regions supported which candidates? Who were the major candidates, and what were their qualifications? Also add more information from the aftermath section to the lede

Those are my thoughts. I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 23:46, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Duonaut: To ensure that they saw the above comments. Z1720 (talk) 20:37, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I had seen this and then sort of forgot about it and moved on to other things. Will put this into action soon and I'll ping you on completion. Duonaut^{(talk | contribs)} 22:32, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: I should be finished. One citation left in the lead but that isn't too easy to work into the body. Otherwise I believe I'm done. If you have any other comments/questions I'll be happy to edit accordingly. Duonaut^{(talk | contribs)} 07:01, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to move to GAN now, but if you have additional comments again feel free to ping me. Otherwise I'll close the review in a few days Duonaut^{(talk | contribs)} 00:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]