Talk:Deolinda Rodrigues/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Yue🌙 01:40, 30 October 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.

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

Nominator: Spookyaki (talk · contribs) 13:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Yue (talk · contribs) 19:16, 27 October 2024 (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, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
Citations 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 20, 21, 26, and 28 were spot-checked for verification. Two issues arose:
Citation 1 gives the nom de guerre Languidila, but the article body cites other sources that give Langidila. Did citation 1 make a typo or are both names used, because if it's the former than the source isn't worth keeping, but if it's the latter than both names should be shown (or the less common one should have an efn note).
You know, I'm honestly not sure. I've seen both. Obviously her published material uses "Langidila." I believe it derives from Kimbundu. "Languidila" might be a Portuguized(?) version of it. Per Pimpão António: "...Langidila [that is the spelling used], the nom de guerre assumed later by Deolinda... is a name in the Kimbundu language, which means 'vigilant' or 'be vigilant.'" For now, I'll change out the Mosaiko article for Pimpão António's article. Spookyaki (talk) 19:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's fine. Yue🌙 22:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rodrígues 2003 doesn't actually go anywhere. Did you mean Rodrígues 2004 or does the source in the bibliography have the wrong year?
Oops, 2003 was actually the correct date. Changed that out in the full citation.Spookyaki (talk) 19:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Content is generally well-done, but I had two major questions after reading the prose twice. Her correspondence with Martin Luther King Jr. is mentioned in the lead, but it is merely a passing mention in the article body. What was the content of these letters, and were they written in Rodrigues' native Portuguese or in English? She also studied in the US for about two years; did she speak any English? These details should be added to the article body.
Expanded a bit on the letters and on Rodrigues's linguistic abilities. Spookyaki (talk) 19:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That looks good. Candido 2018 also mentions that Rodrigues was the only women member of the MPLA's central committee in the 1960s. Yue🌙 22:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added a brief sentence in the first paragraph of "Work with the MPLA" to reflect this. Spookyaki (talk) 23:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Much is discussed about the MPLA's (and therefore, the Angolan government's) views on her, but what about her opponents'? What is her legacy amongst opposition groups and figures (which I assume to be less favourable)?
I couldn't find any information about her reception with specific opposition groups such as UNITA, (my assumption is that they just don't view her as a very important figure) but I did add a paragraph about some of the more general criticisms of Rodrigues and her reception in Angolan society. Spookyaki (talk) 19:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You may also want to add a bit more about Rodrigues' experiences with and opinions of the MPLA's patriarchal organisation and internal misogyny, which is discussed in Martins 2024, p. 240. Yue🌙 22:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reorganized some stuff in the "Work with the MPLA" section to better reflect this. The paragraph starting "Rodrigues's writings from the time..." I opted to use Paraedes instead of Martins because Martins cites Paredes in that section. Spookyaki (talk) 23:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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 non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Final edits look good. Passing. Yue🌙 01:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pass/Fail:

Discussion

I will be completing a review of this article in the next few days. After a quick read, it appears to be reasonably well-written and sourced throughout. I will spot-check the sources shortly.

Some immediate but minor concerns content-wise though is her correspondence with Martin Luther King Jr. is mentioned in the lead, but it is merely a passing mention in the article body. What was the content of these letters, and were they written in Rodrigues' native Portuguese or in English? She also studied in the US for about two years; did she speak any English?

There is also a lot of discussion regarding the MPLA's (and consequently the Angolan government's) views of her, but nothing about her opponents'. What is her legacy with opposition organisations that have long been rivals to the MPLA, such as UNITA? Are there such views available in the collection of sources gathered? Those are a few questions to start with that I hope the nominator will ponder and answer. Yue🌙 19:16, 27 October 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.