Talk:Singapore Portrait Series currency notes/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CorporateM (talk · contribs) 13:39, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the last remaining business and economics nominations not nominated by myself, so I'll take it on. I've started the review below. Mostly two things caught my eye; there are a lot of areas that need context or more explanation that seems to presume the reader already knows a lot about currency and there are some areas where a large body of text goes without a citation. CorporateM (Talk) 13:39, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

done

A few notes:

Need the table with blacked-out images fixed
Done See below. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the references appear to be missing citation parameters
Please point out specific citation problems. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Citations 34 only has a title and link. 33 needs a publisher/author of some kind. Is citation 2 suppose to have those brackets or is that a coding error? CorporateM (Talk) 16:43, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Partly done, clarification needed Fixed problem with citation 2. Removed citation 34 as the information is found in other sources. For citation 33, I thought the Monetary Authority of Singapore would be the publisher? --Hildanknight (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the current article relies very heavily on primary sources from government authorities. These are probably the most reliable for mundane information about the currency, but secondary sources may include more complex news and analysis on it. CorporateM (Talk) 16:46, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

completed
"and ~~a whole range of~~ new security features were introduced." Done --Hildanknight (talk) 09:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Background

completed

"designed by local artist Eng Siak Loy" Does the source tell us who Eng Siak Loy is? Also suggest a separate sentence for this.
Clarification needed Why is "local artist" an inadequate description of him? He does not have a Wikipedia article. In this context, "local" obviously means "Singaporean" as no other countries are mentioned. --Hildanknight (talk)

Oops, you're right. Not sure why I glazed over "local artist" CorporateM (Talk) 12:48, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should this section be called "History"?
Done Good idea. --Hildanknight (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is the second half all contained in that one citation? If so, it might be best to use the cite a few times, so it doesn't look like OR.

Done For the first two sentences in that paragraph, I reused a citation (adding an archive link since the original link had gone dead) from another paragraph. That paragraph was too long, so I removed some information found in other sections and copyedited the sentences. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Security features

done

Titlecaps for "portrait series" I think
Done --Hildanknight (talk) 09:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"with the Merlion" What is a Merlion?
Clarification A Merlion is a mythical creature with the head of a lion and the body of a fish. It is a national symbol of Singapore. --Hildanknight (talk) 09:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe something like "with an image of a mythical creature called the Merlion" with a wikilink would help provide context. CorporateM (Talk) 05:16, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done Added a wikilink and a short explanation in brackets. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"form the cornerstone" is a bit metaphorical for Wikipedia

No offence, but could you suggest a better wording? I assume that, unlike most Singaporeans, you are a native speaker of English. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at this again, is what was meant the physical "corner" of the bill? or was it referring to being a basic foundational aspect of the bill's security features? CorporateM (Talk) 16:13, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification These two security features are the most important visual features of the note. --Hildanknight (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Got it - it could probably be removed, as it already says "two prominent". I can't verify what the source says, but it could also say "two most prominent" CorporateM (Talk) 02:37, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Changed "two prominent" to "the two most prominent" and removed "form the cornerstone of the banknote". --Hildanknight (talk) 16:07, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Even though it's Wiki-linked, I think we should also explain a Kinegram (briefly) here

Could you suggest a good brief explanation? --Hildanknight (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"a printed security hologram" CorporateM (Talk) 02:41, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Hildanknight (talk) 16:07, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I understand how the portrait is a security feature
Clarification According to the MAS website: Hand-engraved and printed in intaglio ink, the portrait serves as a unique anti-counterfeiting feature. The fine lines of the engraving are difficult to imitate or reproduce. --Hildanknight (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest something like "According to MAS, the portrait contains fine lines that are difficult for counterfeiters to mimic." CorporateM (Talk) 02:39, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Added "which contains fine lines that are difficult for counterfeiters to mimic" in brackets.

If possible, the second paragraph could really be more specific. What is meant by lithographic print or a windowed security thread? WHat is LiftTwin?
Clarification Lithographic print means printing using the process of lithography. According to the 2011 edition of Know Your Money, "The smooth, rainbowed and anti-photographic background makes camera counterfeiting difficult and photographic separation virtually impossible." A security thread is a thin ribbon threaded through the note's paper. According to the above link, "The windowed machine-readable thread is interwoven in the paper running vertically down the back of the note. When held up to the light, the thread appears as a bold continuous line..." --Hildanknight (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get brief explanations in the article and make sure they are wikilinked if not already? CorporateM (Talk) 21:45, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Added brief explanations (in brackets) for the above two security features. I removed mention of LiftTwin because I cannot find the original source and cannot find any information about LiftTwin online. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:10, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Banknotes in general circulation

done

"The $10 banknote was the first denomination printed and circulated in its polymer form." -> suggest "was the first denomination in the series printed on polymer"
Done --Hildanknight (talk) 09:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~pioneering~~ promotion
Done --Hildanknight (talk) 09:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It starts talking about Encik Yusof, but without any explanation as to why
Clarification The second sentence of the Background section states: The banknote's obverse features the portrait of the first president of Singapore, Encik Yusof bin Ishak. The reverse contain secondary themes that are linked to his life. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion would be to have a summary for this section before going into the sub-sections, that explains the relevance of Encik and includes the signatories, who are currently repeated in every sub-section.
Clarification Yusof Ishak was the first president of Singapore and the series commemorates his contributions to the country. Each denomination focuses on a different aspect of his life and contributions. There are some minor differences in the signatories for each denomination, so I suggest moving that information to the table. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clarification requested Would the second paragraph of the History section be a good introductory paragraph here? --Hildanknight (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done I reshuffled some information. Please check --Hildanknight (talk) 16:10, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What is "the money cowrie"?

Clarification The cowrie is a sea snail and its shell was often used as currency. For more information, see cowry and shell money. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a wiki-link and brief explanation in the article? CorporateM (Talk) 16:45, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Hildanknight (talk) 16:10, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is "pieces" the right word?

Could you suggest a better word? --Hildanknight (talk) 16:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Coins or bills depending on if its paper or metal. CorporateM (Talk) 21:47, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Hildanknight (talk) 16:10, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Commemorative

completed

"The two authorities" which two?
Clarification The governments of Singapore and Brunei. --Hildanknight (talk)
I see - can we find a way to put this in the same paragraph as the sentence that refers to Singapore and Brunei? CorporateM (Talk) 05:17, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done, please check the new paragraph. If my changes made the prose worse, feel free to undo them. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The link for "Singaporean version" is a broken link and external links are not allowed in the body of the article
Done Link removed. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"has the two countries' state creates above the commemorative text." Not sure what was meant here.
Done That was a typo. Crests, not creates. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a Wikipedia article on the "Currency Interchangeability Agreement" to link to and can we offer a brief explanation for context?
Clarification No such article exists. --Hildanknight (talk) 09:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Can we find a way to sneak in a few words explaining what it is? CorporateM (Talk) 16:15, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Under the agreement, Singapore currency can be used in Brunei, Brunei currency can be used in Singapore and the exchange rate is one Singapore dollar to one Brunei dollar. How could this be explained briefly? --Hildanknight (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My quick take might be something like: "an agreement between Singapore and Brunei allowing their citizens to use currency from either nation interchangeably" CorporateM (Talk) 02:33, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Since the two countries are mentioned earlier in the sentence, I tried "an agreement allowing citizens of both countries to use currency from either nation interchangeably" instead. Does "interchangeably" imply that both currencies have the same exchange rate? --Hildanknight (talk) 16:07, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Specifications

done

All the images are just black squares?
Clarification They were removed by the anti-fair use brigade. --Hildanknight (talk) 09:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest removing them or finding something we can use (I'm a little surprised we can't use images of currency, but not sure of the specific rules. CorporateM (Talk) 05:20, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Should I just remove the entire section and transfer relevant information, such as the dimensions, to the "Banknotes in general circulation" section? --Hildanknight (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I like the table once the images and Status columns are taken out (they all have the same status). It could be done a few different ways, but the way it's done is good. CorporateM (Talk) 02:31, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Partly done I removed the columns for the images, but not the Status column, because I think it could be used for the signatories (which vary slightly for each denomination). --Hildanknight (talk) 16:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Successfully replaced the Status column with detailed information about the signatories. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Prefixes

done

I'm not sure I understand this section.

Clarification The section is about the serial numbers on the notes. --Hildanknight (talk) 09:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether this section is needed. It looks like there are no citations in this section? And I'm not sure the serial numbers are really of encyclopedic/historical significance. CorporateM (Talk) 16:20, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done I agree with you and have deleted the section. --Hildanknight (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@CorporateM: Thanks for your review. Please inform Mailer diablo, the primary contributor to the article, of this review. --Hildanknight (talk) 09:12, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@CorporateM: A few more concerns addressed and a few more clarifications. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@CorporateM: We are getting there! We will get there! --Hildanknight (talk) 16:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@CorporateM: Apologies for the delay, which was due to major deadlines at work and Singapore celebrating Deepavali. Perhaps a minor reorganisation is needed, but we are getting there and will get there! --Hildanknight (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it's almost done; the remaining items are extremely minor and could reasonably be disagreed on by different editors. The only major item remaining I think is how heavily the article relies on primary sources and I wonder if there has been any analysis by independent sources about the reception to the currency, how long they last, their inflation rate, their development process, or something else. CorporateM (Talk) 21:50, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@CorporateM: I believe all concerns have been addressed. --Hildanknight (talk) 16:10, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]