Talk:Chinese Rites controversy/GA1: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 19:09, 3 March 2013

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tomcat7 (talk · contribs) 16:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Some issues with File:Ricci1.jpg. Lacking source information and author make it hard to check if the license is correct. As it is a cleaned version of File:MatteoRicciProminentConvert.jpg, it is fairly easy to add the author (Anthansius Kircher) and date (1667)--Tomcat (7) 16:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It is done. Great suggestion! --_{(comparingChinese Wikipedia vs Baidu Baike by hanteng)} 17:37, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure about the "[i.e., the Christian God]" note.
"but here they had a problem" - something like "but encountered a problem."
I think more text is needed in some sections, eg "Kangxi's ban". I think more content should be added about the responses of other Chinese people, their response of Kangxi's opinion, etc.
" Dec. 8th 1939" - should read "December 8, 1939" or "8 December 1939" per MOS:DATE. Same with "Dec. 8, 1939" in the lead
Was there any controversy after that one?
I would change "Jesuit Missionaries in China" to "Background"
I would link Confucius in the lead
You state eight popes considered the case, but I only see four mentioned. What were the other four pope's responses?
"Joachim Bouvet" is not mentioned in the article. Was he notable to be included here?
"The controversy" -> probably "Controversy" per MOS:HEAD
In the references, p. should be changed to pp. if there are more than one page
Ref 15 "Chinese astronomy and the Jesuit mission: an encounter of cultures": consider adding isbn, page, etc
Ref 16, I can not see the mention of "Mantienne" in the further reading section. Same goes for some other similar footnotes.--Tomcat (7) 19:09, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 #::
 #It is '''factually accurate''' and '''[[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]]'''.
-#:a ''([[WP:FNNR|reference section]])'': {{GAList/check|}} b ''(citations to [[WP:RS|reliable sources]])'': {{GAList/check|}} c ''([[Wikipedia:No original research|OR]])'': {{GAList/check|}}
+#:a ''([[WP:FNNR|reference section]])'': {{GAList/check|aye}} b ''(citations to [[WP:RS|reliable sources]])'': {{GAList/check|aye}} c ''([[Wikipedia:No original research|OR]])'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
 #::
 #It is '''broad in its coverage'''.
-#:a ''([[WP:Scope|major aspects]])'': {{GAList/check|}} b ''([[WP:LENGTH|focused]])'': {{GAList/check|}}
+#:a ''([[WP:Scope|major aspects]])'': {{GAList/check|}} b ''([[WP:LENGTH|focused]])'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
 #::
 #It follows the '''[[WP:NPOV|neutral point of view]] policy'''.
-#:''Fair representation without bias'': {{GAList/check|}}
+#:''Fair representation without bias'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
 #::
 #It is '''stable'''.
@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 #::
 #'''Overall''':
-#:''Pass/Fail'': {{GAList/check|}}
+#:''Pass/Fail'': {{GAList/check|hold}}
 #:: <!-- Template:GAList -->
@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 *Some issues with [[:File:Ricci1.jpg]]. Lacking source information and author make it hard to check if the license is correct. As it is a cleaned version of [[:File:MatteoRicciProminentConvert.jpg]], it is fairly easy to add the author (Anthansius Kircher) and date (1667)--[[User:Tomcat7|Tomcat]] '''''([[User talk:Tomcat7|7]])''''' 16:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 ::Thank you. It is done. Great suggestion! --<sub>([[:zh:User:Hanteng#.E7.A0.94.E7.A9.B6.E9.81.B8.E5.9C.96|comparing]]Chinese Wikipedia vs Baidu Baike by [[User_talk:Hanteng|hanteng]])</sub> 17:37, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
+*I am not sure about the "[i.e., the Christian God]" note.
+*"but here they had a problem" - something like "but encountered a problem."
+*I think more text is needed in some sections, eg "Kangxi's ban". I think more content should be added about the responses of other Chinese people, their response of Kangxi's opinion, etc.
+*" Dec. 8th 1939" - should read "December 8, 1939" or "8 December 1939" per [[MOS:DATE]]. Same with "Dec. 8, 1939" in the lead
+*Was there any controversy after that one?
+*I would change "Jesuit Missionaries in China" to "Background"
+*I would link Confucius in the lead
+*You state eight popes considered the case, but I only see four mentioned. What were the other four pope's responses?
+*"Joachim Bouvet" is not mentioned in the article. Was he notable to be included here?
+*"The controversy" -> probably "Controversy" per [[MOS:HEAD]]
+*In the references, p. should be changed to pp. if there are more than one page
+*Ref 15 "Chinese astronomy and the Jesuit mission: an encounter of cultures": consider adding isbn, page, etc
+*Ref 16, I can not see the mention of "Mantienne" in the further reading section. Same goes for some other similar footnotes.--[[User:Tomcat7|Tomcat]] '''''([[User talk:Tomcat7|7]])''''' 19:09, 3 March 2013 (UTC)