Talk:1957 Polish parliamentary election/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ajh1492 (talk) 23:52, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs some work before it becomes a Good Article.

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
see below

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Passed

Review comments

It's a first reading, I haven't finished yet. Ajh1492 (talk) 23:52, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did some more updates, you might want to check to make sure I quoted the right percentages and sjem size in the infobox. Ajh1492 (talk) 23:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you comfortable with the semi-colon usage in two sentences in the Lede? Ajh1492 (talk) 00:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lede

Lede should contain summary info from Aftermath

Consider use of Template:Infobox election

Might want to look at the 1961 elections article to see what needs to go into the infobox

Background

significant political changes in the government (Władysław Gomułka's ascension to power) they were delayed until early 1957 - consider rewording to eliminate parentheses, it's a little clunky

Among various promises ... promised free elections - how about Among the various promises made by First Secretary Gomułka, during the Polish October peaceful revolution, to the restless Polish population was that of free elections.

secret police (Służba Bezpieczeństwa) - reword to secret police (Polish: Służba Bezpieczeństwa) - check article for consistent use of lang-pl template

candidates from the main communist party (Polish United Workers' Party - PZPR) and one of the lesser communist parties (United People's Party - ZSL).[6] - you've already defined PZPR and ZSL, you can use the acronyms in the rest of the article consistently.

Soviet intervention, in case of G loss were also repeated by Radio Free Europe, - what is a "G loss"

Election results

Its Senior marshal (Polish title for speaker) - is the parenthetical expression necessary, you provided the link just prior to it

Consider putting the results in a table and have the pie chart as a cell in the resultant table - would be consistent with Wikipedia:Embedded_list

Check for correct number of spaces after punctuation

References

Remove redlink in first reference

Google books link is blank on first reference

Replace bad links on reference #5

Consider moving details on reference #6 from Further Reading (Paweł Machcewicz, Kampania wyborcza i wybory do Sejmu 20 stycznia 1957 roku)

I think I fixed most issues. Gbooks links are a bit unstable; the page is there but we cannot view it. It may work one day, again. Ref 5 was replaced, as it is dead and not archived. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:16, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is your source for 456 and 457 (+1) in this? Front of National Unity needs improvement, but if it was PZPR, ZSL and SD, then the FJN gains should not include the "independents". --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The election articles on either side of 1957. Put in whatever number you have a reliable source for. Ajh1492 (talk) 14:33, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I am just doing that :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And done with various fixes and expansions to this and other commie elections articles, for now at least. I will try to get the 1989 one DYKed in a near future, I think :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:29, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]