Talk:Chen Xiaocui/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: GnocchiFan (talk · contribs) 23:53, 9 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):

   I personally would not have as many Chinese characters throughout the article per MOS:ROMANISATION, but I understand why they may be helpful for some so will not oppose them. I would also use the term "died by suicide" instead of "committed suicide" in the lead (or possibly re-write to avoid either formulation), as this seems increasingly preferred by external style guides. However, I'm aware that Wikipedia's Manual of Style allows for this, so again no opposes there. (I'm also just being picky here as it is very difficult to find fault with this article)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline 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:

   Edited to remove possible loaded language

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 non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Congratulations, I see no reason why this article cannot be passed right away. – GnocchiFan (talk) 23:53, 9 January 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.