Jump to content

Talk:Parliament of Malaysia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleParliament of Malaysia was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 7, 2006Good article nomineeListed
August 21, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Good Article review needed

[edit]

This article received its Good Article rating on February 07, 2006 from an editor who hearkened back to a kinder, gentler era when it was not outside of norms to just simply plonk down a Good Article tag for no other reason than WP:ILIKEIT. Alas, the standards for retaining this pretty green trinket have tightened over the year; in the present regime, someone unassociated with writing this article (a reviewer) should examine the article with respect to the good article criteria and, on the various standards cited, expresses up, down, or neutral sentiments, plus an aggregate sentiment, upon which retaining the pretty little trinket relies. By posting this remark here, I'm not suggesting that the article has gone bad or presently fails the criteria, but I am noting the absence of a review that is a hallmark of the present process, and, in the fullness of time, a review should be performed on this article. With the absence of a review, this article is a delisting candidate. Note that, for an editor to delist this article, the due-diligence of a good article review is required. Otherwise, how might a delisting editor justify his or her delisting, or offer cogent reasons why the Good Article mark should remain? In either case, anything short of a fair review is unfair to editors who contribute to this article regularly and in good faith. Drop any questions about this on my talk page. Take care — Gosgood 14:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

[edit]
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Parliament of Malaysia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    The prose is poor in some parts, with language such as "should he dies, resigns" and "religion based" (needs hyphen). There are several cases of spaces before refs, which is not in accordance with MOS. Also, the lead section is too short, and does not cover the history of the institution. The paragraph starting "Most motions are typically..." is only one sentence.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    There are generally too few references. Even purely factual statements need refs if the claim is somewhat particular: "Historically, none of the states forming the Federation of Malaysia had parliaments before independence." "When a member of Parliament dies, resigns or become disqualified to hold a seat, a by-election is held in his constituency unless the tenure for the current Parliament is less than two years, where the seat is simply left vacant until the next general election." etc.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    The "Department of Parliament controversy" is too long and goes into too much detail, which takes the balance from the article.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    There are quite a few quotes and references to the writings of one man, Shad Saleem Faruqi, which gives the impression of undue weight and bias.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Lampman (talk) 17:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since no significant improvements have been made to the article over the last week, I will now delist it. Lampman (talk) 20:50, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Parliament of Malaysia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:33, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The file Dewan Rakyat Malaysia.jpg on Wikimedia Commons has been nominated for deletion. View and participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 22:07, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 16:36, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Events

[edit]

How do we add a recent events label at the start of this article? Recent events in Malaysia are causing a lot of political uncertainty and this page will need to be updated in the near future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NinjaOng (talk • contribs) 07:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parliament_of_Malaysia&oldid=1205498263"