Talk:Zorobabela Kaʻauwai/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 05:32, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 05:32, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Why did I get a message saying it failed? Was that a mistake?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:43, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

• Lead and infobox;
  • during the monarchy; during the monarchy of "whom"?, mention the king
    • Removed as unnecessary.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:35, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Link Protestant faith
    • Done.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:35, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
  • 1799/1806; please a add a footnote why is this confusion in the dates
    • Done but do not know how to add merge duplicate footnotes. Can you help there?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:35, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Infobox; out of Ga criteria
    • 1851, 1852, 1854, 1855 -> 1851–1852, 1854–1855
      • Done.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:35, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Section 1;
  • around 1799 or 1806; add the same foot note
    • Done but do not know how to add merge duplicate footnotes. Can you help there?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:35, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
  • chief? Chief of what? Make it clearer
    • It's a typical Hawaiian noble title usually without territorial designation especially after unification when most chiefs did not rule anywhere.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:35, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
  • in the eyes of the people -> in the public view
    • Done.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:35, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

More later ... Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 15:21, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: Any other concerns? Thanks.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

• Section 2;
  • but served that capacity as assistant to the Chief Justice -> but served in the capacity of a assistant to the Chief Justice
    • Done.-KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
  • His seat in the court was later filled by Joshua Kaʻeo -> His was succeeded by Joshua Kaʻeo
    • Done.-KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
  • until his resignation; any specific reason?
    • No, none stated in the source.-KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
• Section 3;
  • Representative for Wailuku for two nonconsecutive terms; if they were consecutive, it is to be mentioned. If it is not, just leave it.
    • Done.-KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
  • George Kaleiwohi Kaʻauwai married Ulalia Muolo Keaweheulu Laʻanui and became the father of Princess Elizabeth Kahanu Kalanianaʻole, wife of Prince Jonah Kūhiō Kalanianaʻole, the second Congressional Delegate from the Territory of Hawaii -> George Kaleiwohi Kaʻauwai married Ulalia Muolo Keaweheulu Laʻanui, and their daugther was Princess Elizabeth Kahanu Kalanianaʻole, wife of Prince Jonah Kūhiō Kalanianaʻole, the second Congressional Delegate from the Territory of Hawaii; "became the father of Princess" this is a wrong phase because, she was not a princess by birth.
    • Done.-KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
• dup-links
  • American missionaries; para 2 of section 1
    • Done.-KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Lahaina; para 2 of section 2
    • Done.-KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Hoapili; section 3
    • Done.-KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
• External links check shows some links likely to be dead.
  • None of the links are broken; manually clicking them on the article itself shows no problem with them. The suspected one are from Ulukau.org and it has do with a bug in the tool being used that doesn't recognize that site and their links for some reason. See Talk:William Pūnohu White/GA1#Ulukau where I came across the same problem.-KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
• 9.1% confidence, violation unlikely.

Sorry for the delay. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:17, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: Done with this batch. Please let me know if there is anything else. Thanks.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:43, 27 March 2017 (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):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (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:

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 fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 23:59, 27 March 2017 (UTC)