Article (edit | visual edit | history ) · Article talk (edit | history ) · Watch
Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs ) 12:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
I'll take this review. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk ) 12:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Is it well written ?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections , layout , words to watch , fiction , and list incorporation :
Is it verifiable with no original research ?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline :
B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources , including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged , and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines :
C. It contains no original research :
See spotcheck below
D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism :
Earwig shows 64%, but that's due to long quotes, so it's fine.
Is it broad in its coverage ?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style ):
Is it neutral ?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable ?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images ?
A. Images are tagZhejiang Pilot Zoneged with their copyright status , and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content :
B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions :
Overall :
Pass or Fail:
I will get to this review in the next week. If you have time, please consider reviewing an article at WP:GAN . I will be using this review in the WikiCup . ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk ) 12:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Random source spotcheck
12 good
24 good
35 good
47 good
48 good
Notes
All quotes need to be referenced with inline citations.
Done . The Account 2 (talk ) 13:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
The list in the Zhejiang Pilot Zone section would be much better served in a table per MOS:EMBED .
Done . The Account 2 (talk ) 13:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
No need for tenses like "has [verb]" when talking about Xi, just use the past tense, otherwise it'll become weird in a few years. i.e. "The term has seen a large revival" --> "The term saw a large revival", "It has also been speculated" --> "It was also speculated" etc.
Done . The Account 2 (talk ) 13:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ]
Thanks a lot! The Account 2 (talk ) 13:53, 8 March 2023 (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.