Talk:Zhong Jingwen

Zhong Jingwen has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: September 11, 2024. (Reviewed version).

China Low‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Folklore Low‑importance

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Folklore, a WikiProject dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the topics of folklore and folklore studies. If you would like to participate, you may edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project's page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to discussion.FolkloreWikipedia:WikiProject FolkloreTemplate:WikiProject FolkloreFolklore articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Zhong Jingwen appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 14 September 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Zhong Jingwen was known as the "father of Chinese folklore studies"?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2024/September. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Zhong Jingwen.

Wikipedia

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 11:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that Zhong Jingwen co-founded China's first folklore society in 1927, and then another in 1983?

Source: Liu, Xiaochan (2022). "A Centennial Overview of Folklore Studies at Sun Yat-sen University". Western Folklore. 81 (2/3): 163–176. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27152280. p. 164.

Zhang, Juwen (2018). "Folklore in China: Past, Present, and Challenges". Humanities. 7 (2). doi:10.3390/h7020035. ISSN 2076-0787. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/7/2/35

- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Big Duck

Created by Generalissima (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 65 past nominations.

Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 02:13, 26 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

QPQ is done, article is new enough and long enough, earwig returns a 0.0% chance of copying, and the hook is interesting. I don't have access to JSTOR right now so I will assume good faith on the sources. Seems good to me! Di (they-them) (talk) 02:29, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:24, 11 September 2024 (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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Zhong Jingwen/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 20:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk · contribs) 01:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 01:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is good.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Style is good.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Sources are listed.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Everything is cited to academic publications or to the institution the subject was affiliated with.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Article accurately reflects the sources.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Article does not contain plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Article covers the subject's entire career.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Article stays on topic.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article reflects the viewpoints of sources.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article is stable.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Only one image is used, public domain.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	The only image is a photograph of the subject.
	7. Overall assessment.

Quickfail criteria

Y Article looks solid.
Y Earwig is still down, so I can't do the full Earwig search, but Earwig's source search gives 4.8%. A Google search of random phrases from the article does not indicate any copyvio.
Y No cleanup banners.
Y Article is stable.
Y No previous review.

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

All sources look reliable. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some interlanguage links, so just make sure they're correct. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead section

Born in Eastern Guangdong in 1927, No he wasn't. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. - G
alongside a number of other prominent academics including → alongside academics including — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. - G
were ~~greatly~~ disrupted — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. - G
Should the image caption mention the name of his wife? I see she's not mentioned in the body, but it still seems strange to just refer to her as "his wife". — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I cannot actually confirm his wife's name. - G
  - Just to clarify, you're sure that the person in the image is his wife, but you don't know what her name is? I'm looking at your source for the image (using machine translation) and it appears to label her as Chen Qiufan. A Google search for "钟敬文" "陈秋帆" shows several results. I don't know what Chinese sources are reliable, but if RSes mention his marriage, it should probably be mentioned. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 20:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Yep. I can't find any RSes that mention his wife by name, but that definitely is him and his wife. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Early life and career

I think referring to Folksong Weekly as "prominent" is a bit WP:PEACOCKy. Maybe say something along the lines of "a large journal edited by high-profile academics" (Gao, 53). — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 22:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Generalissima: This is the only comment you haven't addressed yet. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:00, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vigilantcosmicpenguin: Oops! I think it works fine if I just remove the "prominent". Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 04:09, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've made some small copyedits for conciseness. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 22:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Postwar career

More small copyedits. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 22:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Peking University source (machine translated) appears to mention that he continued being a professor until his death. There should be a mention of his later teaching career. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 02:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source spotcheck

I'll be reviewing the sources that are in English. As of this revision. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 02:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Y
Y Though it should say "at least ten other universities" to match the source.
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Though instead of saying "the most prominent" it'd be more accurate to say that it has the most issues.
Y Though it says "studies" plural.
Y Though it says the title of the article was "Some Basic Understandings About Folk Literature and Arts".
Y
Y But maybe specify that the society was unofficial.
Y
MDPI is known as a predatory publisher, so I'm not sure if it's a great idea to cite one of its journals here.
Y
Y Though I would say "vice chief editor" is a slightly different thing than "chief vice editor".
See above.

@Vigilantcosmicpenguin: Okay! Thank you very much, I think I got to everything. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 03:33, 11 September 2024 (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.