Talk:Languages of Singapore/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I'll make straightforward copyedits as I go and jot queries below: Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Singapore English is first thing mentioned in text yet omitted in lead.
- The visibility of English was also heightened through heavy usage by successful media outlets - like...what?
- Primary 1 - link or explain
- Mandarin Chinese section needs ref for first two paras
- The English as the main language section doesn't give me an idea on how/where one might hear official English, Singapore English, or Singlish. A few sentences here for overview would be very helpful.
- In the Media and the arts section, I don't get a sense of what proportion of TV, radio, newspapers and magazines are in English vs Mandarin. Important to add as the sections following are quite detailed about chinese dialects, so some balance is needed.
1. Well written?:
- Prose quality:
- Manual of Style compliance:
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
- References to sources:
- Citations to reliable sources, where required:
- see above; some bits need inline referencing - No original research:
3. Broad in coverage?:
- Major aspects: - see above. I think the holes need explaining.
- Focused:
4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
- Fair representation without bias:
5. Reasonably stable?
- No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
- Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
- Pass or Fail: - Sad to say, I am going to fail this now as the nominator nor anyone from the Singapore wikiproject have taken up the offer of fixing the issues. I don't think it'd take too much to get this to GA, but definitely would benefit from the input of someone knowledgeable on the subject. Anyway, a new editor can see this sometime and find things to fix readily. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:09, 12 January 2011 (UTC)