Talk:Marco Kartodikromo/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Tea with toast (talk · contribs) 03:30, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Review
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Well done! --Tea with toast (話) 23:03, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail:
While I am satisfied that this article meets the criteria for GA, there are few things that might benefit the article moving forward:
- The first sentence "Further career..." section: "Kartodikromo was soon chosen by Goenawan...". The word "soon" is ambiguous, and it would be better to put a more precise date on that.
- Sadly none of my sources have a date. They have a nearly 2-year gap in which it could have happened.
- I feel the "Themes and styles" section could be expanded. Throughout the "Further career..." section, there is not much information given for each of the written works that Kartodikromo authored. I think it would be good to elaborate on these, especially if they were contributing factors for his imprisonment.
- Agree. I'll try and do that when my current project is finished. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:27, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- One of the categories listed is apparently non-existent (red link). While this may not be a problem if the category is to be created in the future, I just thought I'd mention it in case it was a typo (from my investigation, I couldn't find any categories that would replace it, I just thought I'd mention it).
- Removed. I seem to remember something about not having redlink categories in the MOS. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:27, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Happy editing! --Tea with toast (話) 23:03, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:27, 16 June 2012 (UTC)