Talk:Qualifying industrial zone/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Pre-review Notes
[edit]- How many QIZs are there? Put that in the lead.
- Countries aren't wikified.
- Many confusing terms aren't wikified. Basically, link any terms that someone not familiar with the subject might not understand.
- A better explanation of the regualations section would be nice.
- Expansion of Criticisms section possible?
Review by ErikTheBikeMan
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- There doesn't seem to be that much citing/referenceing. For example, the entire first paragraph has only one citation. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- Per above. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- Per notes 1, 4 and 5. Also, an expansion on the history section would be nice, if possible.ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- There may be some conflict, per this diff. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- No further edits were made relating to that diff. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 20:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- There may be some conflict, per this diff. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Are there images?
- B. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- C. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- I'm not too sure that the last image is apporpriate. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- A. Are there images?
- Overall:
- Pass.
- I'm placing this review on hold for seven days for the nominator/other editors to fix the issues raised above. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- Passed. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 20:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm placing this review on hold for seven days for the nominator/other editors to fix the issues raised above. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- Pass.
Replies
[edit]Thanks for reviewing it.
- How many QIZs are there? Put that in the lead.
- Done
- )
- Done
- Countries aren't wikified.
- WP:CONTEXT does away with linking country names (Reference: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-09-08/Dispatches 2)
- WP:CONTEXT states that "Relevant connections to the subject of another article that will help readers to understand the current article more fully...This can include... topics that already have an article..." I would like to see some of the names of major players in QIZs linked, even if the links are to "Economy of..." ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 22:43, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- WP:CONTEXT does away with linking country names (Reference: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-09-08/Dispatches 2)
- Many confusing terms aren't wikified. Basically, link any terms that someone not familiar with the subject might not understand.
- Could you point out some terms? I'll be glad to wikify them.
- tariff or quota restrictions
- trade zones
- eight-year old free trade agreement between the United States and Israel (link to the article about that agreement)
- value-added goods
- boycott
- Et cetera. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 22:43, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- A better explanation of the regualations section would be nice.
- Tried to convert it to prose... its a horrible mess now. I'm not sure if this is what would make it clearer. Let me know. I'll try and think of something better
- I still think that all the precentages make the section hard to comprehend. Perhaps the list was better, with an explanation at the endErikTheBikeMan (talk) 22:43, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Tried to convert it to prose... its a horrible mess now. I'm not sure if this is what would make it clearer. Let me know. I'll try and think of something better
- Expansion of Criticisms section possible?
- So far, that's the only reliable source that covers criticism. :(
- Understood. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 22:43, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- So far, that's the only reliable source that covers criticism. :(