Talk:Banton, Romblon/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Bilorv (talk · contribs) 19:31, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

The lead is extremely short: it should be 2-3 paragraphs for an article of this length.
Banton is already inhabited during pre-colonial times — change "is" to "was".
Under "Modern history", "Jones" should not be in bold.
The "Tourism" section appears to be completely unsourced.
A large portion of the "Local government" section appears to be unsourced, as is the last paragraph in "Demographics".
The article is not neutral, containing passages like: World-class reefs in the island, perfect for snorkeling and scuba diving.
Places listed under the "Tourism" section shouldn't be in bold.
The education system in Banton is not even mentioned.
Why was the location originally called "Banton"?
Does Banton have a coat of arms?
"Copra" should be linked.
The article contains few references.
Things in the infobox like the demonym of "Bantoanon" are unsourced.

The article is also very small compared to other GA geography articles. See, for example, Chiprovtsi for a good municipality article.

Fail for GA: This article currently does not meet the GA criteria. — Bilorv ^(talk)_(contribs) 19:58, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]