Talk:Ministry of Justice (Soviet Union)

Ministry of Justice (Soviet Union) has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 23, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed
February 20, 2011	Good article reassessment	Kept

Current status: Good article

Soviet Union: Russia / History High‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Russia portal This article is supported by WikiProject Russia (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ministry of Justice (Soviet Union)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ryderofpelham123 (talk) 21:34, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken on reviewing the article and will post a review shortly. Ryderofpelham123 (talk) 21:34, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Assessment

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
Several spelling errors are present

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Article meets MoS criteria
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
There are references to sources laid out in an appropriate section

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Citations are appropriate and are to reliable sources

C. No original research:
Article reflects the sources and adds nothing new
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:
I did feel that the topic of the article was conveyed well, even with spelling errors.

B. Focused:
Article remains on topic
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Article appears neutral - following the sources closely, and not loading the article with undue praise or criticism
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Article is stable
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:
There is only one picture relating very broadly to the article.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
1. The article needs to be expanded and corrected for it to be considered for GA. While this article is a good start, and it is very important, it is not GA material. However, I am upgrading this article to B status. Also, more pictures relating to the topic need to be added.

Ryderofpelham123 (talk) 21:47, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reassessment Potential

After speaking with the creator and principal editor of this article, I have decided to place this article's GA nomination on hold. Many of the mistakes I cited were not actual mistakes but information I was not familiar with. After the creator/editor of this page has made the appropriate changes, I will reassess this article. Ryderofpelham123 (talk) 23:56, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

I added two images.
I havn't found a method to link a translated version of the Russian text, but you could probably translate the text at Google translate.
All the Russian refs have a English translation of the title.
Question, those this mean that there are no serious grammer mistakes with the article?

--TIAYN (talk) 08:28, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I really like all the revisions you have made to the article. There are no serious grammar errors, so the article looks ready for a reassessment. Ryderofpelham123 (talk) 17:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Final Assessment

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
All errors have been fixed.

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Article meets MoS criteria
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
There are references to sources laid out in an appropriate section

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Citations are appropriate and are to reliable sources

C. No original research:
Article reflects the sources and adds nothing new
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:
I fely that the topic of the article was conveyed well.

B. Focused:
Article remains on topic
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Article appears neutral - following the sources closely, and not loading the article with undue praise or criticism
Is it stable?
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:
The new pictures are a great addition to the article.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

The article's revisions came out very well. This article meets GA standards and with a little more work could be a candidate for "A" status.

Thanks! :) --TIAYN (talk) 18:48, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear TIAYN, as a major contributor to the article, you don't have the right to assess this article. This article is effectively B class and in no way a GA. I am reassessing it as a B class R.Sivanesh ✆ 17:38, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't pass the article, the reviewer did..... He just forgot to sign his/her own statement. --TIAYN (talk) 23:21, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ministry of Justice (Soviet Union). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:32, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ministry of Justice (Soviet Union). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110823112610/http://ntc.duma.gov.ru/duma_na/asozd/asozd_text.php?code=106956 to http://ntc.duma.gov.ru/duma_na/asozd/asozd_text.php?code=106956

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:07, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]