Talk:Sumgait pogrom/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: JohnGormleyJG (talk · contribs) 16:32, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I will review this next. -- JohnGormleyJG (✉) 16:32, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Main Review

Overview

The entire article is well referenced to reliable sources. These sources are fully cited to the correct way as should be according to WP:FNNR. The images are appropriate to the article in their correct sections. The content is well written and explained well. The article is very well presented altogether with good grammar and spelling.

Infobox

• Good Infobox
  

The infobox is very good. It contains the key information. It is well referenced correctly.

• Good Image
  

The image featured is a good encyclopedic image for the article's infobox. It contains a suitable caption.

Lead Paragraph

• Well Written
  

The entire lead section is well written with good grammar and spelling.

• Well explained
  

This explains the main points quite quickly as is what the lead is suppose to do.

• Well Referenced
  

The sections points are referenced to reliable sources and avoiding self research. The references are cited correctly.

• Overall
  

This is an excellent lead section, it entices the reader for more detail, as the main points are summarized. The section is not too big. Very well referenced.

Background

• Well Written
  

The section is well written. Contains detailed information in dept that is explained well and easy to read

• Well Referenced
  

All the information is backed up by a reference from a reliable source. All references are fully sited.

• Good Images

The images featured are very good as they explain the text featured. The map and diagram are both used for encyclopedic use.

• Overall

This is a very good section in the article, very good images, linked to other articles for more information, well referenced and written.

Pogroms

• Well Written
  

As per rest of the article this is still very well written, whilst using a neutral point of view in the text.

• Well Referenced
  

Very good referencing in this article throught. Referenced to reliable sources correctly obliging the Manual of Style WP:FNNR.

• Good Image
  

The image is appropriate to the information in the section, containing a caption explaining the image.

• Overall
  

This is another well done section, it is referenced very well, a good image, presented very well containing the quote box rather than using the quote marks (“.....”). The quote box stands out better to the reader, only should be used for bigger quotes / statements as is in the article. The paragraphs are a good size each making it more engaging for the reader. Instead of having a big chunk of text. It makes it easier to view and find the info you are looking for.

Government Reaction

• Well Written
  

This section is well written as is the whole article.

• Well Explained
  

The sections content is explained well.

• Well Presented
  

The content is presented well, especially the quote box being present.</>br

• Well Referenced
  

The section is fully cited and referenced.

• Overall
  

Everything is fine here, there is nothing wrong with this section. It is well written, referenced, explained and presented.

Aftermath

Good Section

Criminal Proceedings

Good section everything fine

Rest of Article

Well Referenced
Well Written
Everything Fine

Overall Review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A.Yes this article is very well written.

   B. The layout is correct.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   AYes the whole article is very well referenced, and correctly referenced.

   B. All references are to reliable sources.

   C. Contains no original research.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Yes. It addresses the main aspects of the topic

   B.Yes all information is valid to the article.

4. Is it neutral?

   Yes article is not biased it contains neutral point of view

5. Is it stable?

   Yes article is stable

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged

   B. Images are relevant to the topic

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

This is an excellent article very well done to all the frequent contributors here, keeping this article in control very good article definitely approves to be a good article. Good job. -- JohnGormleyJG (✉) 18:18, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Note to JohnGormleyJG: it is an extremely rare article that has nothing wrong with it: no typos, no grammatical flubs, no other issues. This article was not immune, and these issues should be fixed before the GA is awarded. For example, the second sentence in the Radio broadcast subsection of the Background section is not only a run-on, with more commas than necessary, but the final period is missing. I also see close paraphrasing, if not copyvio, in the final sentence of Asseessments and consequences, even to the structure of the original, which is quite concerning since the review doesn't mention copyvio/close paraphrasing being checked. I must also confess that your closing comment worries me: "keeping this article in control very good article definitely approves to be a good article" is not even comprehensible. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:13, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I could not come across any typos of such when I read this? Is there something that I missed, if so please tell me. Thanks -- JohnGormleyJG (✉) 19:25, 8 July 2015 (UTC)