Wikipedia:Featured article review/Gwoyeu Romatzyh/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 by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 4:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC) [1].

Gwoyeu Romatzyh

Notified: Remsense, Theknightwho, WikiProject China, WikiProject Taiwan, WikiProject Writing systems, diff for talk page notification (2024-06-25)

I initially raised my concerns about the Featured Article's current quality two years ago, like in-depth coverage and sourcing. This year, there have been edits in attempt to address the issues, so I listed the article at WP:FARGIVEN. I was pinged to review what has been done so far. I gave the edit a good review, but I'm unsure how "satisfactory" the article is to this date because I've not been too thorough with the article amid my review. I really hope this Review ends without heading to the FARC. George Ho (talk) 21:38, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what else to say other than I think I've done a sufficient job maintaining FA status for this article, but if anyone has any concerns I'm glad to address them. Remsense诉 10:54, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems pretty close to FA criteria, but I notice a few things. 5 seperate sources listed in the bibliography appear to not be cited at all (Chen 1999, Ch'en et. al 2000, DeFrancis 1972, Lin 1972, Simon 1942.) Should these be incorporated or can they be cut from the bibliography?

Additionally, the article doesn't talk about its use by the PRC - neither the date it was adopted or the date it was superseded by the Hanyu Pinyin is mentioned or cited, despite the 1949–1987 in the infobox. Also, the UN used it from 1945–1971 according to the infobox, but this is also not elaborated on at all. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:10, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thank you for the observations! I'll cut the unused sources from the bib for now. Remsense诉 16:13, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I lived in Taiwan 20+ years ago, I found GR was not super rare among company names, so I am surprised we have so little examples of use in Taiwan between 1945 and 1986. Shiatzy Chen seems to be an example of a GR name? The "Tonal spelling" section could do with some examples; it is hard to understand the way it is and seems unreferenced. In particular, which sounds are considered sonorants in Chinese? —Kusma (talk) 16:51, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I have a much better sense of how to source this sort of information now, so it should be little issue incorporating it into the article. :) Remsense诉 16:56, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Remsense: How are things going here? Nikkimaria (talk) 15:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the majority of coverage pointed out above, basically just cleaning up the basic rule description and adding an example table. Remsense诉 20:39, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kusma: other than the Taiwan usage details, what do you think about the article presently? Remsense诉 20:06, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I haven't been able to get myself to do much wikiwork recently (I probably need one of my periodic breaks). I think the main issue for me really is that the article focuses quite a lot on the early history and YR Chao's contribution, with rather little on post-WW2 usage or why GR was dropped. My edition of the Taiwanese MoE's children's dictionary (2000 printing of the 1993 version) gives pronunciation in Bopomofo plus GR, so there is at least anecdotal evidence that use of GR was not completely dropped yet during the 1970s. (BTW here is some comment on the use of GR in YR Chao's Grammar). —Kusma (talk) 22:10, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That's the one area I still need to buff up. I'll bug you again when I feel that's tied up. Remsense诉 22:22, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Remsense: Any update? Nikkimaria (talk) 17:23, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been able to find much secondary attestation of use in Taiwan after 1986, truth be told. Remsense ‥ 论 05:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@George Ho: Have your concerns been addressed? Nikkimaria (talk) 14:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope so, but I'm uncertain. Kusma's opinions should have more depth than mine. George Ho (talk) 15:07, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kusma? Nikkimaria (talk) 14:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find much scholarly literature about the use of GR in Taiwan either. There is probably something about ad hoc romanisation (inspired by GR, WG and just random Hokkien sound) somewhere, but it is a bit tangential to the questions at hand. My concern about "sonorants" has been addressed. I really don't have time for a deeper dive into the article right now, so you can treat my concerns as having been addressed. —Kusma (talk) 18:47, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Treat my review as "addressed" by default for now as well. I don't see any obvious issues at this time. The article quality is FA-quality, AFAICS. No missing important details. As described, this romanization fell out of favor in both China (for pinyin) and then Taiwan (for phonetic symbols II). George Ho (talk) 20:35, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This removal candidate has been kept, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for circling back around on my—and many others'—cases in order to help these processes along. I know it must be frustrating sometimes, but it does help me get my business together and push through to do what needs to be done to get articles how I want them to be. Remsense ‥ 论 14:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.