Talk:Ho Chi Minh/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gabriel Yuji (talk · contribs) 22:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

I'll do this one as soon as possible. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 22:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Review

Probably a more strict user would quick fail it. Our GAN instructions say, "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article on the article talk page prior to a nomination". I see that's your case, as you only started to edit in November, fixing some internal links, and since then you only removed uncited material and added a url, but no content at all. However, this is a detail, of course; the main problem is that the article is far from meeting the second GA criteria (verifiability). I mean, it's clear just from a glimpse that there are several unsourced statements (or at least that don't have in-line citations) e.g. "Early life" two first paragraphs, "First sojourn in France", "Political education in France"'s last paragraph, most of "In the Soviet Union and China" (in which there's even a "citation need" tag). It doesn't seem that there was a systematic academic literature review too. Although The New York Times and Time are not bad sources at all (and you can use it if needed), academic ones would be preferable. But there are blatantly unreliable sources such as U-s History, Rationalrevolution.net, and even Wikipedia itself (WP:WINARS). Because of this, I didn't even read the article properly, but one-line paragraphs such as in "Legacy and personality cult" indicate that it doesn't meet the "well-written" criteria too. Honestly, you'll have to do a major restructuration here to meet the GA criteria, Txantimedia. If you're willing to start to do it, I can keep it open as you work on it; otherwise, it's better to fail it so you can work with no deadline. Look at Vladmir Lenin or John Tyndall to have an ideia of what you should aim for. Sincerely, Gabriel Yuji (talk) 22:55, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

I think it would be better to fail it and revisit the issue at a later date. Meanwhile, I will work on more sourcing. Txantimedia (talk) 00:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Ok. I've just failed it accordingly. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 15:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)