Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Burma/archive1

Myanmar

Nomination for featured article quality- Since 2006 (last nomination) the article has been greatly expanded, particualrly the "Culture" section and the lead paragraph. Information on the country's history has been extensively covered and referenced since last nomination, and every paragraph is thoroughly referenced with citations of reputable sources (NGOs, government agencies, academic journals, encyclopedia, etc.)

Self nomination After an extensive peer review of this article, tremendous changes have been made, improving the article's quality, tone, and verifiability. Therefore, I nominate this article. --Hintha 17:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support with quibble. All objections I pointed out at the last FAC were solved. The only thing is that I would rather see the lead expanded slightly to reach 3 paragraphs instead of 2, given the article length (48k). -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 17:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The first reference I clicked on (currently number 41) doesn't go to the article indicated. Please doublecheck all your refs, and let me know when you're done. Sandy 17:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Response Not sure what you mean by "doesn't go to the article indicated". I clicked on #41 and it went right to the correct note at the bottom.--WilliamThweatt 19:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Response Oh, now I see -- the link itself pointed to the wrong article. I have fixed the link and checked the others. They all appear to be fine now.--WilliamThweatt 19:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support article has vastly improved over last FAC. It went through Peer Review answering all concerns raised there. A tremendous amount of research, fact-checking and general copyediting has went into this version of the article. Article now appears to meet all the criteria for FAC.--WilliamThweatt 19:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support as it meets all of the Featured article criteria. Hintha 19:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
SupportMild Object, the article switches between DD MMM YYYY and MMM DD YYYY. They should all be the same, preferably MMM DD YYY. Other than that, good work. Rlevse 20:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Response Those have been fixed. --Hintha 21:06, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment and ~~mild object~~. The article shouldn't use MM DD YYYY as this is not Myanmar's standard, MM DD YYYY is only used in the US, Canada, Micronesia and Indonesia. --Oldak Quill 12:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Response That seems to be user preference issue, because despite how the date is placed in the editing box, its display (MM DD YYYY > DD MM YYYY and vice versa) can be modified in the user preferences. Hintha 13:02, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Since anons, who make up the majority of our readership, do not have this choice, it is not an issue of preference. The date format should be determined by the subject matter. --Oldak Quill 16:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - That has been taken care of. --Hintha 21:46, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although the sentences are still a little choppy, I think the article's strengths outweigh its weaknesses and deserves to be featured.

**Comment Also:

~~"endowed upon its peoples a rich and unique heritage"~~

~~The lead is not a brochure. Every country in the world has a rich and unique heritage. Again, see the lead in Canada~~
Otherwise beautiful article --User:Jaw101ie 22:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

worked on that. Rlevse 00:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Image:Daw_Aung_San_Suu_Kyi.JPEG needs fair use rationale. Andrew Levine 23:21, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Taken care of. Rlevse 00:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object there are some referencing problems, and prose problems, which call for a thorough copy edit by a fresh set of eyes. Picking a random section in the middle:
- Myanmar is one of the poorest nations in the world, suffering from decades of stagnation, mismanagement, and isolation. Needs a reference: there are various ways of measuring wealth, and the reader isn't told what this is based on.
- Lucrative industries of gems, oil and forestry remain heavily regulated. They have recently been exploited by foreign corporations which have partnered with the government to gain access to Myanmar's natural resources. Needs a reference.
- Myanmar was designated a least developed country in 1987.[39] Tourism has been encouraged by the government. However, fewer than 750,000 tourists enter the country annually.[40] Prose is choppy.
- Not comprehensive: Many nations, including the United States, Canada, and the European Union, have imposed trade sanctions on Myanmar. Why? Problems with human rights are mentioned in earlier sections, but this sentence leaves us hanging.
Those are examples from a few paragraphs only. Sandy 02:14, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. 1ne 17:46, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Object Image:National League for Democracy flag.png, Image:MyanmarAdministrativeDivisions.png and Burmese characters should be in SVG. Also, is it necessary to include so many government departments in the external links? WP 11:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It is comprehensive, has undergone mostly minor edits recently, etc. --Gray Porpoise 19:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose

The politics section should be about the government now - not other counties and human rights organisations views of the government. The article doesn't even mention what sort of parliamentary system the country operates under, that there are political parties or that the country has elections or the frequency of those elections. Discussion of foreign relations, sanctions, military abuses ect should all be moved to a section on foreign relations and military. At the very least the internal politics need to be distinguised from the international politics.
The image Image:Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.JPEG should not be there, I don't think that fair use is justified here.
There is no mention of media in the culture section, is there freedom of the press in Myanmar?

--Peta

- Response The government does not have a parliament (it never convened) at present. The majority of political parties elected in the last election (held in 1990) have been illegalised (which are all in the History section). The government is the military. --Hintha 05:25, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - This section should explain that - it should not be coloured by whether we think that is a bad thing. The way it is set up does not present a NPOV.--Peta 13:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - I've added information about politics, and moved foreign relations/military to a new section. I've also removed the Aung San Suu Kyi image. Hintha 00:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - I'm a casual browser of this article, and would like to know why Peta thinks Image:Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.JPEG would not be not fair use here. She's being discussed in the Politics section, and the caption giving an overview was sourced. I won't readd the image, since it's not essential, but I thought her image illustrated an important element of Myanmar's politics, and added a visual human element to the Politics section. The next prominent face is several sections below, in Demographics. TransUtopian 04:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - The photo of Aung San Suu Kyi should be replaced. She is one of the foremost politicians/leaders/symbols and known worldwide. Her contributions and legacy are very important, as the article discusses so I believe the use of the photo is not only justified but added quality to the article.--WilliamThweatt 04:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The image of Aung San Suu Kyi is not necessary for us to understand what is going on in the text, it is not commented on in a meaningful way - so the rationale for fair use is just not there. Read WP:FU if you need more infomration on what is and isn't a fair use. The politics secion has improved - but still needs work, the last paragraph in particular should be divided between history and foreign relations. there is still no mention of media in the country and as Tony points out below, the grammar needs work.--Peta 00:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Would a public domain photo of her be okay? I'm still looking. state.gov's only Burma pic of her is credited AP/Wide World Photo. TransUtopian 02:31, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object per Sandy. It's good in many respects, so why not network to find someone else to go over it properly. For example, the lead has the following blemishes:
- "on the north" should be "to the north" - I notice that after a sequences of ons, we do finally get a "to".
- "overcome coups d'état" - is this a reference to the current military dictatorship? If so, it's unclear.
- "The country's culture, heavily influenced by regional neighbours,..." - Pick the two redundant words.
- "One-third of Myanmar's total perimeter" - Just "A third" will do; remove "total".
- "Myanmar's diverse population" - This is vague.

Please don't just fix these examples; the whole text needs serious attention. Tony 16:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Object. A citation spot check turned up enough problematic cases to suggest a wider issue with referring to sources that relate to but don't directly support the article's claims (results here). Someone needs to go through and straighten that out; also, books cited need ISBNs. --Robth^Talk 05:18, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]