Wikipedia:Peer review/Malaysia–Vietnam relations/archive1

Malaysia–Vietnam relations edit

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because this article did not pass the GA criteria according to one reviewer. I think the article meets the Wikipedia:Good article criteria after an energetic effort to expand the article, complete with detailed Bibliography and in-line citations according to Wikipedia's Citation guidelines. There was only one reviewer for the article while the article was nominated, and he had suggested a restructuring of the article which I felt, would break the content flow of the article based on the new structure, but welcomed the reviewer to make edits accordingly if he/she so wishes. It was pretty disappointing as the reviewer was adamant about not making significant edits as the reviewer claimed "a conflict of interest", and the article ended up not promoted at all. I felt that insufficient attention was given to improve the article, and the reviewer seem to "wash up the case" with minimal effort. Feel free to read or go through Talk:Malaysia–Vietnam relations/GA1 for understanding or reference. My perception maybe wrong, too, and I am therefore listing Peer Review for this article. Reviewers are strong welcomed to make any modifications/edits to improve the article, as well as provide additional opinion if the article is suitable for GA status.

Thanks, Mr Tan (talk) 11:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program edit

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
  • Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.[?]
  • If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.[?]
  • As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), please do not link words in headings.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings.
  • There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
    • allege
    • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).[?]
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
    • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • The script has spotted the following contractions: won't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas.

-(tJosve05a (c) 23:43, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]