Wikipedia:Featured article review/Flag of Hong Kong/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was kept 10:02, 17 August 2007.

Flag of Hong Kong

ZScout370, K.C. Tang, Deryck Chan, WP Hong Kong notified Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 17:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC) WP Heraldry and vexillology and WP China notified.[reply]

Message left at Mcy jerry

Obvious lack of references, prose is rather weak as well. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 16:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HK Japanese Occupation poster radio exercise.jpg has no source (its on Commons and mentions English Wikipedia as the "source"), so we cannot verify the copyright. Design and History sections totally clear of inline citations. The last paragraph of Desecration section does not adhere to MoS on currency. Resurgent insurgent 03:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Image has been removed[1] and currency format has been corrected.[2] Adding citations will take a little more time. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to leave a note here, but I've started working on the article, adding sources and doing general clean-up. I've left a message at WikiProject Hong Kong about this FAR and User:SandyGeorgia also left a message at WikiProject China. Some of the content might need some reconstructive surgery if we can't find sources to back them up. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article, in its current state, is not up to the FA standard, which has kept rising over the years. The most valuable things in the article are the graphics. I won't be surprised if it is de-featured, which has happened to many a FA created during the earlier years of Wikipedia. Cheers.--K.C. Tang 06:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps I shouldn't've said "standard", but something like "paradigm". People just have different expectations these days.--K.C. Tang 06:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It can be seen that the majority of information provided appear to be derived from one primary source at [3]. This may be the reason why referencing and prose becomes an issue, since the writer may not find it neccesary to insert frequent references to the same source, and much of the article's text are paraphrased from the source text. The graphics are definitely very well-done, thou.--Huaiwei 09:49, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article is not long, it's absolutely possible to get it back to FA standard. So please help. I found a great source that has a lot of the information we need as references.[4] Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Inline footnotes are being added, linking to sources already cited in the article or somewhere else. Moreover, I suggest that Mcy jerry be informed and have him responded before this FAR comes to a close. Jerry was the primary contributor of the early stages of the article. He contributed at least half of the original text and nearly all of the external sources. --Deryck C. 02:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm afraid he's not likely to respond... he's made only 50 edits since June last year - "busy in real life", according to his user page. Resurgent insurgent 12:12, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's been a few days since anybody has commented here, so I just wanted to leave a note here to say that the article is steadily being worked on. Here is a diff between the current version and the version that existed at the time this FAR was filed.[5] Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 08:03, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made a couple of small fixes, but this phrase in section "Respect for the flag" really stumped me: "Furthermore, certain actions... may be considered flag desecration. An exception is the use of flower petals when unfurling the flag." If anyone knows how the flower petals are really being "used", please correct that phrase. Resurgent insurgent 12:07, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah that section needs a bit of copy-editing and maybe expansion. It also needs some sources. The Regional Flag and Regional Emblem Ordinance Section 7 covers flag desecration[6], and Section 6 covers how it may not be used[7], specifically that it should not be used in trademarks and advertisement, as well as other uses stipulated by the Chief Executive. But the "Respect for the flag" section states other uses that are prohibited which I can't verify with the Ordinance, like using it as a tablecloth or drapery. That may be usages that were stipulated by the Chief Executive that were not spelt out in the Ordinance. We'll have to find sources for that. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:52, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Alright I've re-written the section. But I think I'll combine it with the existing "Desecration" section later. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:06, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Concerning Jerry's inactivity, I should be able to contact him from outside Wikipedia in a few days through the HK Wikimedians' networks. --Der yck C. 17:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, all or most of the facts presented in the article should have references now. If there's still anything that needs referencing, please leave a note either here or in the article Talk page. I've either found sources for the content or have deleted content I cannot verify. The article still needs some general clean-up in terms of better prose and maybe some re-arranging of the sections. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, please take a look at the article to see what else needs to be done to keep its FA status. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- On a quick pass, it looked OK: pls leave a message to Jaranda to revisit. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ok. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Sorry for the delay. Yea...have been very busy in real life of late, so I could not make any prompt responses for the time being. Thanks fo all your hard work anyway. :-) -- Jerry Crimson Mann 01:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Everything seems fixed Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 01:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Same feeling here. --Der yck C. 05:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.