Talk:Islam in Taiwan/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Carabinieri (talk · contribs) 16:46, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Initial review

Hi, thanks for all the work you've put into this article. There are some issues:

I think this article needs some copyediting to improve the prose. I'm not really the best copyeditor, so you might want to consider asking around, maybe at WP:GOCE or a relevant WikiProject. If you need help finding a copyeditor, I can try. Here are a few examples:

"Islam in Taiwan is a slowly growing religion and represents about 0.3% of the population" Islam in Taiwan isn't a religion, Islam is (corrected)
"There are around 60,000 Muslims in Taiwan,[1][2] in which about 90% of them are of the Hui ethnic group" should be "of which" and no "of them", could also be simplified to "90% are Hui" or "90% belong to the Hui ethnic group" (corrected)
"There are also more than 180,000 foreign Muslims working in Taiwan" This contradicts the previous sentence. (that 0.3% figure refers to the Muslims who are citizens in Taiwan. Foreign Muslims mostly comprises of expatriate or temporary workers, in which most likely they will return back to their home countries after their employment contract have ended. So how to write this? Of course generally we do not take into account tourists and foreign workers into a country's demographics structure)
"as well as other foreign Muslim nationals" What's a Muslim national? (corrected)
"As of 2018, there are eight mosques throughout Taiwan" Why not just "in Taiwan"? (corrected) Also that sentence uses the word "mosque" three times and should probably be simplified (corrected - reduced to two "mosque" words, one because of its official name (Taipei Grand Mosque))
"Taiwanese Muslims, which mostly came from Chinese Muslims in Mainland China," do you mean "descended"? (corrected)
"Nevertheless, they practically face no problem at all with any of the visiting Muslims from other schools" Seems a bit strange to call immigrants visitors. (rephrased)

I'm not sure about the reliability of the following sources. Could you explain why they are reliable? (Generally I completely understand the reliable sources needed to write articles in Wikipedia, and I've tried by best to find as many sources as possible but still keeping in mind sources such as personal blogs shall never be used. But things about this topic has so many new changes/things that occur almost every week or month, most of them are highly contemporary matters yet very important. So even the highest reliable sources (e.g. government statistics department) may never reflect the facts and truth out there. So I'm sort of like trying to find a balance here between reliability and up-to-date information. For sure none of the "sensational" or "trivial" news/statement ever been written in this 'Islam in Taiwan' article.)

islam.org.hk
star2.com (general-public online news in Malaysia, equivalent to BBC, CNTV or CNN)
The youtube video in fn 3
taipeitrends.com (general-public online news in Taiwan)
islaminchina.wordpress.com
the video in fn15
Taiwan Fun
worldbulletin.net (general-public online news in Turkey)
Crescentrating
Shangrila Leisure Farming
islamweb

The following links are dead or lead to something other than the source cited:

fn6 (removed already)
fn17 (removed already)
fn21 (removed already)
fn29 (removed already)
fn30 (removed already)
fn45 (removed already)
fn47 (removed already)

There are some books or other longer sources cited without a page number.

In fn 16 (also an extraneous asterisk) (how to view this?)
In fn 19 (corrected)

Fn 24 is actually a newspaper article in Republika (corrected)
I've only checked the first 50 footnotes. (need to rewrite the footnote new numbering again because there are some references deleted or added during this first correction stage)
There are still a lot of unreferenced paragraphs and sections. (by all means please highlight which parts/sections require references or citations)
You might also want to check that the sources actually say what is attributed to them:

As far as I can tell, the source in fn8 doesn't mention the Kingdom of Tungning (added new reference) and it also doesn't say that the Dutch were only in Tainan
"Due to the absence of any formal Islamic education in Taiwan" The source merely says that public schools don't offer courses in religion (it was a paraphrasing from my side. or i should write "Due to the fact that public schools in Taiwan do not offer courses on Islamic religion, therefore..")

That's it for now, but maybe you could start working on these things and I'll check in again later. (no worries, do take your time) --Carabinieri (talk) 17:28, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for all of these inputs so far :D Chongkian (talk) 03:05, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your replies. Those prose issues I listed were really only a few examples. I'm afraid this article really needs the help of a more experienced copyeditor. A lot of it is hard to understand.

I also don't really think those sources I listed (other than star2) pass WP:RS.--Carabinieri (talk) 13:04, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still interested in pursuing this, Chongkian?--Carabinieri (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm waiting for your next inputs of edits. Or you mean I need to remove those sources first? Chongkian (talk) 00:16, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think it might be easiest if you could take care of the issue with the sources as well as the copyediting first. The article would probably be easier to review then.--Carabinieri (talk) 01:13, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll put this on hold in the meantime.--Carabinieri (talk) 13:57, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chongkian,

I'm going to go ahead and close this nomination. I'd encourage you to try and find more reliable sources. I don't think sources being recent is that important, while reliability is. I'd also encourage you to find a native English speaker to copyedit the article. WP:GOCE might be a good place to do that.--Carabinieri (talk) 15:00, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]