Talk:Xi Jinping/GA2

GA Review

NOT PROMOTED

This article has failed its GA nomination. --DannyS712 (talk) 17:19, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: DannyS712 (talk · contribs) 11:58, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Notes

Plagiarism issue, shown below. Though the new york times is cited, their specific language is used; it shouldn't be. Though the paragraph includes quotes, the ordering, connection, and introduction of them is an issue:

Article	New York Times
As communist ideology plays a less central role in the lives of the masses in the People's Republic of China, top political leaders of the Communist Party of China such as Xi continue the rehabilitation of ancient Chinese philosophical figures like Han Fei into the mainstream of Chinese thought alongside Confucianism, both of which Xi sees as relevant. "He who rules by virtue is like the Pole Star," he said at a meeting of officials in 2013, quoting Confucius. "It maintains its place, and the multitude of stars pay homage." In Shandong, the birthplace of Confucius, he told scholars that while the West was suffering a "crisis of confidence," the Communist Party had been "the loyal inheritor and promoter of China's outstanding traditional culture."	“He who rules by virtue is like the North Star,” he said at a meeting of officials last year, quoting Confucius. “It maintains its place, and the multitude of stars pay homage.”In November, Mr. Xi visited Qufu, Shandong Province, where Confucius was born, to “send a signal that we must vigorously promote China’s traditional culture.” He told scholars that while the West was suffering a “crisis of confidence,” the Communist Party had been “the loyal inheritor and promoter of China’s outstanding traditional culture.”

Captions

`Xi` and `Xi Jinping` are both used at times; I know that `Xi` is short for `Xi Jinping`, and in prose `Xi` is frequently used after the first mention in a paragraph, but the captions should be consistent
BRICS leaders Vladimir Putin, Narendra Modi, Dilma Rousseff, Xi and Jacob Zuma at the G-20 summit in Brisbane, Australia, 15 November 2014 caption links `...G-20...`, while World leaders assemble for 'family photo' at G20 summit in Hamburg links `...G20...` - I don't care, but the term used should be consistent
Xi Jinping, Peng Liyuan and Barack Obama in the Lincoln Bedroom - should be `President` Barack Obama

Layout
1. there are 2 "note" tags that are never intentionally shown, ending up displayed at the bottom (below the authority control box)
2. I count 7 one-sentence paragraphs
3. The `Human rights policy` section contains: a {{main article}} tag, and a subsection, `Religious policy`, which itself only contains: a {{see also}} tag, and a one sentence paragraph
References: some specific issues identified below, if needed I can point out more specific issues but generally the section is in poor shape
1. Some of the "references" should be notes about translations (75, 76)
2. The citations (251, 252, 253) to "Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China." all return bad gateways, and thus cannot be verified
3. Some of the references are missing details; many online sources should be rechecked, and date-accessed should be added. Additionally, 66 should credit "Simon Elegant" as the author, 104 should credit "Andrew Jacobs", 162 - "Craig Whitlock", 166 - "Michael Martina", 176 - "Shannon Tiezzi", 214 - "Philip Wen and Stella Qiu", 215 - "Lily Kuo", 216 - "James Griffiths", 219 - "Evan Osnos"
4. 13 should include publication on "June 24, 2014", and the author wasn't "Tiezzi, The, Shannon"
5. 10 gives a page range of "pp. 28–"
6. 106 has issues with italics
7. 113 starts with "1 :46." - what does this mean, and why the space?
8. Some of the references don't use normal citation templates, resulting in a weird order of information; 110, for example, lists the author in the middle
9. 107 and 108 both have missing spaces before a `[`
Stability: I do not believe the article to be stable during any time that it is not protected
1. Since I closed the previous GA, and excluding my own (few) edits to the page, I count:
  - 26 rejections of pending changes (since expired)
  - 37 undos
  - 41 rollbacks (not including ClueBot NG)
  - 2 reverts by ClueBot NG
  - 2 revision deletions
2. from January 3 to 20 July, when the article was protected, protection that was removed on 25 July. Following that, there were
  - 2 undos
  - 4 rollbacks (not including ClueBot NG)
3. until the article was again protected on 3 August. Once that expired, there was
  - 5 undos
4. until the article was again protected on 13 August. Since that expired, I count 6 undos and a rollback. Unless the article were again protected or configured with pending changes, I do not consider it to be stable

As a result of the above, I have placed this GAN on hold. Given the scope of the needed changes, I understand if the nominator does not wish to continue at this time; if that is not the case, please let me know if you have any questions. --DannyS712 (talk) 06:55, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

@DannyS712: Hi, I edited the article according to your recommendations. As for the sources, where can I find the access dates for them? The Account 1 (talk)

@The Account 1: for access date, it should have been when the source was originally added; I suggest verifying them now and adding today as the date (also, please remember to use ~~~~ instead of ~~~, otherwise pings don't work) --DannyS712 (talk) 20:30, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the list of specific sources noted is not exhaustive; there are lots with missing authors or other information DannyS712 (talk) 20:31, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@The Account 1: thank you for your work improving this article. However, at this time I am going to fail its good article nomination. The article is not stable enough to be a good article, nor is the content up to par. Among the remaining issues with references:

Ref 80 cites the daily mail, which is considered unreliable
Ref 113 gives the wrong publication date (source says Jul 4, 2015)
Rfe 114 lacks publication date (source sasy July 17, 2017)
Ref 183 lacks the publication date (2017年1月11日 = 1/11/2017) and author (黄安伟)
Ref 184 lacks publication date (January 11, 2017), but is the same source as ref 185, so they should be combined
Ref 198 gives the wrong publication date (source says Aug 15th 2013)
Ref 221 gives the wrong publication date (source says March 30, 2015, which the article being included in the April 6, 2015 issue; citation says publication on April 6, 2015)

If you continue working on this, and nominate it again as a good article, please ping me to review it. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 17:18, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.