Talk:Toni Musulin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Toni Musulin was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. 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.
December 18, 2010 Good article nominee Not listed

Another source[edit]

An article on TimesOnline which gives some more details about the theft: [1] Laurent (talk) 16:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Toni Musulin/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: KimChee (talk) 09:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

First impressions[edit]

I will review this article. Upon first look, no dead or disambiguation links. The existing prose appears acceptable, but the article is otherwise short and unprepared to pass GA review unless drastically improved. For example:

  • Insufficiently sourced: The lead contains an unsourced paragraph (this would be acceptable if the lead summarized information elsewhere in the article that was properly sourced). I found the French version of the quote "he is a responsible man ..." in citation [6]; please note that every quote must be immediately followed by the citation of the source (see WP:QUOTE). However, the quote "We will do everything so ..." is unsourced.
  • Broadness of coverage: No information about Musulin's background or his upbringing? The infobox mentions he was born in Serbia; when and how did he enter France? When did he acquire the Ferrari? The lead mentions discussion on a social networking site — which site(s) are these?
    • I also recommend checking for accuracy as the infobox had previously listed Serbia as his place of birth, though this source states that he was born in Saint-Martin-d'Hères. KimChee (talk) 10:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Images: None to illustrate the topic?
  • Copyediting needed:
    • First and last paragraph in lead section are each only one sentence long.
    • Date formats can be either in American or British style, but should be consistently applied in the article and followed by a comma after the year, especially if used as a parenthetical in mid-sentence.
    • Number formats should use decimal periods (not commas) in English language articles
    • Usage of "euro" that is not at the beginning of a sentence should be lower case.
    • Names of publications, such as The Epoch Times should be italicized and spelled correctly. It is also not always necessary to include the names of publications in the prose if they are cited in the references. KimChee (talk) 22:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Bonne chance d'améliorer l'article. KimChee (talk) 09:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for the review and suggestions. I'll have a look at it and try to improve the article. Laurent (talk) 09:43, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I haven't forgotten about the article. I will try to do the changes as soon as possible. Laurent (talk) 02:37, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Summary[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

{{subst:#if:This article is short and requires improvement to pass GA review.|


This article is short and requires improvement to pass GA review.|}}

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{1acom}}}|}}
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    {{subst:#if:Copyediting needed (see above).|Copyediting needed (see above).|}}
  2. 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:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{2acom}}}|}}
    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:
    {{subst:#if:Sections of the article, including quotes, are unsourced (see above).|Sections of the article, including quotes, are unsourced (see above).|}}
    C. It contains no original research:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{2ccom}}}|}}
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: [[File:|16px|alt=|link=]]
    {{subst:#if:|{{{2dcom}}}|}}
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    {{subst:#if:Lacking information about the subject's background or upbringing.|Lacking information about the subject's background or upbringing.|}}
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
    {{subst:#if:|{{{3bcom}}}|}}
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{4com}}}|}}
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{5com}}}|}}
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    {{subst:#if:No images.|No images.|}}
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    {{subst:#if:If finding a free image of the subject is difficult, I suggest looking for location maps or perhaps matching models of vehicles used in the crime.|If finding a free image of the subject is difficult, I suggest looking for location maps or perhaps matching models of vehicles used in the crime.|}}
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    {{subst:#if:Symbol delete vote.svg GA failed. Sorry, but no activity on article by nominator in the past 4 weeks. KimChee (talk) 00:27, 18 December 2010 (UTC)|Symbol delete vote.svg GA failed. Sorry, but no activity on article by nominator in the past 4 weeks. KimChee (talk) 00:27, 18 December 2010 (UTC)|}}