Talk:Kuching/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 19:20, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll take this one and will finish the review within 48 hours. Thanks! ☯ Jaguar ☯ 19:20, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

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

Initial comments

"Kuching (Malaysian pronunciation" - I would lose the quote "Malaysian pronunciation" as it's often discouraged from leads - pronunciations regardless of regional dialect would be the same Done
"with a population about 165,642 in the north and 159,490 in the south" - just curious, why two different figures? Is the city literally split into two? Done
"Kuching is a major food destination" - a food destination? How so? Is that its main form of industry or is that its main tourist attraction? Done
The lead needs to be expanded so that it meets the GA criteria and WP:LEAD. I usually follow the guideline that the lead has to act as a "mini-article" so it summarises everything within at least three paragraphs. Settlements, regardless of their size almost always have at least three paragraphs, so another one could be added here to elaborate on Kuching's history, development and main tourist attractions. Done
Shouldn't the capital "Capital city" be renamed to "governance" or something similar? Done
"Sarawak was part of the Bruneian Empire since the first Brunei sultanate, Sultan Muhammad Shah" - doesn't make any sense, should this mean since the rein of Sultan Muhammad Shah? Done
"Kuching is the third capital of Sarawak, founded in 1827" - this is within the opening of the history section, is it still the capital? Done
"Prior to the founding of Kuching, the two past capitals of Sarawak were Santubong, founded by Sultan Pengiran Tengah in 1599, and Lidah Tanah" - should these be linked? Not done
"During the Second World War, six platoons of infantry from 2/15 Punjab Regiment were stationed at Kuching on April 1941" - in April Done
"However on 24 December 1941, Kuching was surrendered to the Japanese forces" - was there a battle of some sort? Or did the Japanese conquer Kuching? Done
The Etymology sub-section should typically be its own section, above the history section Done
"The highest point in the city is Mount Santubong on the Santubong peninsula, which is at 810.2 metres (2,658 ft) AMSL" - this would read better as just 'above sea level' without the link Done
Is a list of all police stations in the Courts of law and legal enforcement sub-section really crucial? Done
"Air" section is unreferenced. Done
Be careful of WP:OVERLINKING and WP:JARGON in the Education section. Done
The last paragraph in the Leisure and conservation areas section is unreferenced, as is the Music section. Done

References

Ref 38 is dead. Done

On hold

In its current standing there are a lot of prose issues and lack of content that stand in the way of this becoming GA. The major concerns here is that the lead does not summarise the article, and that there are so mentions of WP:JARGON in some sections (I mentioned above) and some sections need would benefit from a copyedit. I'll put this on hold for the standard seven days, please let me know if you have any questions ☯ Jaguar ☯ 19:38, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jaguar, I have rectified most the concerns outlined by you in the "initial comments" section except for the linking of "Santubong" and "Lidah Tanah" in the "History" section. It seems that there are very few online sources that can further describe these places during the era of Bruneian Empire. Each of these places does not have their own wikipages yet. Do let me know if there is any other improvement needed for this article. Thank you for your time in reviewing this article. Cerevisae (talk) 14:50, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Close - promoted

Extremely impressive - the article has improved by leaps and bounds! The lead has been expanded to summarise the article and the prose has improved so much than before this GAN. Thanks for all your efforts with this article, it's very deserving of GA ☯ Jaguar ☯ 21:35, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the promotion :-) Cerevisae (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]