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

Reviewer: Quadell (talk · contribs) 18:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator: Lemurbaby

I will study this article carefully, and I hope to have the review complete by the end of the week. Regarding my reviewing style, issues I identify below will be prepended by the number of the relevant GA criterion. As they are resolved, I will cross out the issue number. Comments that are not actionable requirements are not prepended. – Quadell ^(talk) 18:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The prose is generally clear and engaging throughout. The lead is a fair summary of the entire article, conforming well to WP:MOSLEAD. Since these can be the hardest parts of writing a "Good Article", my hat's off to you.

• 6a I can't find any evidence that the photographer of File:Jean-Joseph Rabearivelo.jpg died more than 70 years ago. Due to the URAA mess, we would have to show either that the image was first published before 1923, or that the author died before 1926, in order to show that its copyright has expired. (This seems to be one of those frustrating cases where everyone uses the same image and everyone assumes it's free, but no one can provide any solid information about its providence that would verify this. )

• You're right - the photo was part of the original article before I began rewriting it (the entire thing had been plagiarized from a book), and after searching I can't find info about this or any photo of him. I'll have to change the copyright info to fair use. I'll come back to this shortly. Lemurbaby (talk) 12:28, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I requested that the wiki commons image be removed, and uploaded a better (less "crazy"-looking) fair-use image instead. Lemurbaby (talk) 23:32, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  That's fine. I wish we had some information on one of the photos, but what can ya do? – Quadell ^(talk) 14:25, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 6a I suspect you didn't actually create File:Jean joseph rabearivelo high school in Antananarivo Madagascar.JPG in 1899.

• Fixed. :) Lemurbaby (talk) 12:28, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1b There is a bit of overlinking in the article. WP:OVERLINK advises against linking "everyday words" along with "names of major geographic features and locations; languages; religions; common occupations", etc. I think the following terms should not be linked: poet, poetry, librarian, France, Paris, Madagascar, Malagasy language, French language, English language, Spanish language, Hebrew language, debt, and poverty; and in addition, a good case could be made that caste, suicide, and martyr should not be linked either. In addition, since 19th-century French literature and 20th-century French literature have already been linked, I'm not sure the link to French literature is useful. Also, French Madagascar is linked twice in two sentences: once as "colonized Madagascar" and once as "French colony". Further, since Andriana is clearly linked and defined in the "Early period" section, the word "aristocracy" in the "Childhood" should probably not link to Andriana. Finally (and similarly), since Hainteny is defined and linked in the "Late period" section, it should not be linked as "kabary" in the "Early period" section.

• Tried to remove many of these. Lemurbaby (talk) 12:28, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  You fixed some, but left a few. Many of the ones you left are borderline, so not a big deal, but the most questionable links are to France in "When the French colonized Madagaskar", and to English language in "The first complete English translation". I removed those links; hope you don't mind. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:25, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1b On the other hand, it is fine to link terms both in the lead and in the body. Terms in the lead that the reader may not fully understand, such as Negritude, Surrealism, and Exposition Internationale des Arts et Techniques dans la Vie Moderne (at "World Exhibition in Paris"), should be linked in the lead.

• Done. Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1b Related to the above, I suppose it would be marginally useful to link to National Library of Madagascar both in the lead and in the "Legacy" section, although it's the barest of stubs. Still, one article at a time, right?

• Done Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1a Some sentences in the article use the serial comma, while others do not. MOS:SERIAL tells us "Editors may use either convention on Wikipedia so long as each article is consistent within itself." I like the serial comma personally, but you're free to either always include or always omit it. Here are some examples:
  • Serial comma: "the death of his young daughter, the French authority's decision to drop him from the list of exhibitors at the World Exhibition in Paris, and a growing debt"
  • No serial comma: "the privileges, prestige and wealth"
  • Serial comma: "a lace designer, an errand boy, and a secretary"
  • No serial comma: "learning English, Spanish and Hebrew" (etc.)

• Thanks for catching this! Nice work. I've gone through and made corrections to the serial comma wherever I noticed it was missing. Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1a The lead states "Rabearivelo committed suicide by cyanide poisoning in 1937, fostering an image of Rabearivelo as a colonial martyr." Repeating the name seems a little clunky, and I'm not sure "fostering" is the right verb to use here. What would you think of "Rabearivelo committed suicide by cyanide poisoning in 1937, leading to the impression that he was a colonial martyr" or "...contributing to his image as a colonial martyr"?

• Revised Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 2a I love how meticulously sourced everything is, but the very first sentence outside the lead plays a bit of "citation tennis", batting from 1 to 2 and back several times. Since nothing there is contentious (except for the exact date), I would recommend having [1][2] at the end of the sentence. I think that's less visually distracting.

• Done Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1a The first part of the "Childhood" section links to Kingdom of Imerina with the words "former monarchy". But later, Imerina is mentioned, and the reader doesn't know what it means. I would recommend wording it "...to which they had been entitled under the former monarchy, the Kingdom of Imerina." (As an alternate solution, you could decline to link "former monarchy" at all, and just link "Imerina" the first time it is mentioned.)

• Good suggestion! Went with option #1 Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1a Using the word "reportedly" seems like a hedge in "He was also reportedly reluctant to become religiously observant." The source flatly states that he was expelled "for refusing to join the religious order". Unless there is a reason to doubt this, I would simply add this reason to the list of reasons for his expulsion ("lack of discipline and poor academic performance").

• Done. Lemurbaby (talk) 23:41, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1a The article states "He ended his studies at Ecole Flacourt in 1915 at the age of 13." If that is true, then he could not have been born in 1903. Since his birth year is listed as uncertain, we should not be certain about his age at specific years.

• I removed this - I believe it was the only instance where I listed his age. Lemurbaby (talk) 23:41, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1a The first paragraph of "Early period" ends with "...including Pierre Camo in 1921 - Madagascar's postal magistrate and founder of the literary magazine 18° Latitude Sud - and Robert Boudry, the colony's financial manager." I can see why you used dashes, but in my opinion this would be comprehensible without dashes if the names were reversed, as: "...including Robert Boudry, Madagascar's financial manager, and Pierre Camo, the colony's postal magistrate and founder of the literary magazine 18° Latitude Sud." If you choose to keep the dashes, then you should either use em dashes or spaces en dashes, as per WP:MOSDASH.

• Reversed the name order and omitted the dashes. Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1a "In it he honored Rainandriamampandry, then-governor of Toamasina who was executed by the French in 1896..." feels a little clunky. (I'm not sure when "then" is, and it feels like a comma may be needed.) How about wording it as: "In it he honored Rainandriamampandry, the former governor of Toamasina who was executed by the French in 1896..."?

• That phrasing works better - I've made the change. Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 4 "Hedonist" seems like a value judgment (though I see the source calls him an "Épicurien"), and I doubt he was an "ethical hedonist" like the Hedonism link mainly discusses. What would you think of wording that sentence and the next this way? "He was also a womanizer, pursuing relationships with a wide variety of women throughout his adult life, and he abused alcohol and opium, becoming addicted while still in his twenties." I think that ties the facts in better with the sentences that precede and follow. What do you think?

• Sounds good, thanks! Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1a There's no need for a comma after "in an emerging literary movement"

• Removed. Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1b The Assimilation (French colonial) article is linked at "Rabearivelo's trust in the assimilation messages". But it would be better to link it where it is first mentioned, earlier in the paragraph, at "the success of the French assimilation policy and the beneficial effects of colonialism".

• You're right - fixed. Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1b In "he then took 14 .25-gram quinine capsules", it is usually better to spell out "fourteen", per WP:MOSNUM, and this is a case where it would be clearer to do so. Also, either "0.25-gram" or "250-miligram" would be clearer.

• Replaced. Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1b I don't think the critic's phrase "alienating modernity" refers to Modernism, the artistic movement. I believe it refers to the alienating experience of living in the modern world. So I don't think it should link to Modernism.

• Removed. Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1b Jacques Rabemananjara and Radio France Internationale should be linked.

• Done

• 1b It seems Négritude should have an accent? Also, Négritude should be linked at the first mention (in "Legacy"), not the second.

• Googling the term without the accent, I see it does exist officially in English as "Negritude". Authors who write it with the accent are borrowing the French spelling and writing other French words and names with their accents as well. It seems on English wikipedia that the Negritude article's name should be corrected. Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah, okay. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:25, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1b Is the "Francophone University Agency" the same as the Agence universitaire de la Francophonie? If so, that should be linked as well.

• Good catch - linked. Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 1b The ((Persondata)) box gives his birth year as 1901, though the article gives it as either 1901 or 1903.

• Fixed Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 2b I have done some spotchecks on various sources, and I have usually found the statements fully sourced (and never with any plagiarism). But there is a strong claim I wanted to double-check: The article states that "Rabearivelo has been recognized by the Government of Madagascar and art critics as the greatest literary figure in Madagascar", and this is sourced to Riffard's biography. I don't speak French, and Google Translate is always dodgy with these things, but I can't find that claim supported in the source. Since it's one of the bases for similar strong claims in the first sentence of the lead, I want to make sure it's solidly sourced. Does Riffard fully support this? If not, are there other sources that could strengthen this?

• I've reworded it slightly to better match the way he is described in the new sources I've used here. Lemurbaby (talk) 00:23, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Very nice! – Quadell ^(talk) 14:25, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 2a This is a better source for the online text of Rabearivelo (2007) than the link given in the references.

• In all my articles I link to the first page of the book preview. That way if someone clicks the link and isn't familiar with how google books works, they won't have to puzzle through how to access the preview. Lemurbaby (talk) 23:32, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  That's a good idea. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:25, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 2a Is this the same book as the Auzias and Labourdette text in the article? (It has the same ISBN, and page 142 still seems to be about Rabearivelo and Rajaonarison... but the title mentions "2008-2009" rather than just "2008")

• Yes, it's the same one... corrected Lemurbaby (talk) 02:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  I added the link as well. – Quadell ^(talk) 14:25, 24 September 2013 (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.	Very good. All issues resolved.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	All issues resolved.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	All issues resolved.
	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).	Very well referenced.
	2c. it contains no original research.	No problems.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	It covers every major aspect of the topic. In fact, it may be the most thorough and neutral English-language biography of Rabearivelo.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	No problems.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	No problems.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No problems.
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.	All issues resolved.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	No problems.
	7. Overall assessment.	This excellent article is a fascinating read. I am delighted to elevating this article to GA status.