Talk:2021 Serbian local elections/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: WhinyTheYounger (talk · contribs) 19:30, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	The prose is good and I have made minor copy editing adjustments as needed.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. 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).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	None detected.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	As mentioned in 1a, there are some issues with readability when it comes to background knowledge. For example, it’s not clear from the text that ethnic considerations are at play in Serbian politics, but some facts hint at it — for instance, that all Serb parties in Preševo formed a coalition. Brief background somewhere in the article as to this phenomenon, especially as it relates to the demographics of the respective towns (are they majority Albanian? Serb?) The breakdown of how parties performed is well written, but it is not clear from the article what these elections meant for Serbian politics as a whole — was this a victory for the ruling national government? A setback? Moreover, what issues were at play in these elections? See other inline tags ((e.g. Further explanation needed, clarify) for comments as well. Issues fixed.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Hi, thanks for your comments, I'll start working on the issues now. --Vacant0 (talk) 20:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the government campaigns in Zaječar, it was allowed to campaign during the last week before the election, although later that year a document was signed which among other things, also outlawed this. If that election was held today, it would be illegal to do that. The source rather points this out as criticism, and as they stated "seventeen officials visited the municipality during the last month". I think it's alright now, although if not, I can remove that part. --Vacant0 (talk) 21:16, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think that I've fixed the issues. I've added the fact that Preševo is majority Albanian, and there seems to be no sources pointing out "what these election meant for Serbian politics as a whole", although it is stated that SNS managed to successfully form local governments in those municipalities. And as I've pointed out back in the peer review, there aren't any sources that point out the issues that took place during the election. If there is anything else that I can try to do or find, let me know. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk) 22:10, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Apologies for the delay, I've been a bit sidetracked. I'll have this done within 36 hours at the very most. WhinyTheYounger (WtY)(talk, contribs) 19:26, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks! Vacant0 (talk) 19:42, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One note re: Brnabić is still unclear ("although some non-governmental organizations criticized them, and stated that 'seventeen officials visited the municipality during the last month'.") — From the article, it looks like Brnabić's critics were implying she used government funding/official resources to campaign, correct? If so, it would he helpful to explain that. That sentence is also unclear grammatically (Brnabić was the one who stated seventeen officials visited, yes? Why is that relevant?) Everything else looks good! WhinyTheYounger (WtY)(talk, contribs) 21:56, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"The Transparency Serbia organization announced that the highest state officials visited Zajecar and Kosjeric 17 times in the last month, compared to 22 times during the previous four years, estimating that it was a electoral campaign." — this is the direct quote from the source, although looking at that part now, I think that it's useless, there wasn't an aftermath regarding that situation. I'll remove it. Vacant0 (talk) 22:42, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing! Vacant0 (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]