Talk:Culture of the Song dynasty/GA1

Latest comment: 14 years ago by Junipers Liege in topic GA Reassessment

GA Reassessment

edit

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

Commencing GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Juniper§ Liege (TALK) 02:12, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Issues over GA quality regarding this article echo those found in the other articles on the Song dynasty that I have reviewed for the GA Sweeps. Although this article is probably the best written, it also suffers from overlinking and the lead is too short. Juniper§ Liege (TALK) 18:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):
    • The body of the article is well written. The layout is properly presented; paragraphs are a good size and well developed, with no single or fractured sentences.  
    b (MoS):
    • Conforms to manual of style. Problems with overlinking have been fixed and reduced.  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    • Well referenced. Good variety of sources.  
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    • Citations are to third party publications.  
    c (OR):
    • No evidence of OR.  
  3. It is broad in its scope.
    a (major aspects):
    • Addresses major aspect of article subject matter.  
    b (focused):
    • Remains focused. No digressions.  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy:
    • No issues concerning POV evident.  
  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):
    • Images are properly tagged and justified.  
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    • Images are accompanied by contextual captions. 
  7. Overall:
    Keep/Delist: KEEP  

I have passed this; BUT the lead is a cause of concern - it is barely adequate for a GA article of this length and needs expansion. Juniper§ Liege (TALK) 22:26, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply