Talk:Zhong Jingwen/GA1

GA Review

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: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 20:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk · contribs) 01:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I'll take this one. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 01:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is good.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Style is good.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Sources are listed.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Everything is cited to academic publications or to the institution the subject was affiliated with.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Article accurately reflects the sources.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Article does not contain plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Article covers the subject's entire career.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Article stays on topic.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article reflects the viewpoints of sources.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article is stable.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Only one image is used, public domain.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	The only image is a photograph of the subject.
	7. Overall assessment.

Quickfail criteria

1. Y Article looks solid.
2. Y Earwig is still down, so I can't do the full Earwig search, but Earwig's source search gives 4.8%. A Google search of random phrases from the article does not indicate any copyvio.
3. Y No cleanup banners.
4. Y Article is stable.
5. Y No previous review.

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Initial comments

1. All sources look reliable. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
2. I've added some interlanguage links, so just make sure they're correct. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Lead section

• Born in Eastern Guangdong in 1927, No he wasn't. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Fixed. - G
• alongside a number of other prominent academics including → alongside academics including — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Fixed. - G
• were greatly disrupted — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Fixed. - G
• Should the image caption mention the name of his wife? I see she's not mentioned in the body, but it still seems strange to just refer to her as "his wife". — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
  • I cannot actually confirm his wife's name. - G
    • Just to clarify, you're sure that the person in the image is his wife, but you don't know what her name is? I'm looking at your source for the image (using machine translation) and it appears to label her as Chen Qiufan. A Google search for "钟敬文" "陈秋帆" shows several results. I don't know what Chinese sources are reliable, but if RSes mention his marriage, it should probably be mentioned. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 20:34, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

    Yep. I can't find any RSes that mention his wife by name, but that definitely is him and his wife. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Early life and career

• I think referring to Folksong Weekly as "prominent" is a bit WP:PEACOCKy. Maybe say something along the lines of "a large journal edited by high-profile academics" (Gao, 53). — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 22:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

  @Generalissima: This is the only comment you haven't addressed yet. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:00, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

  @Vigilantcosmicpenguin: Oops! I think it works fine if I just remove the "prominent". Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 04:09, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

• I've made some small copyedits for conciseness. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 22:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Postwar career

• More small copyedits. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 22:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
• The Peking University source (machine translated) appears to mention that he continued being a professor until his death. There should be a mention of his later teaching career. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 02:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Source spotcheck

I'll be reviewing the sources that are in English. As of this revision. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 02:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

2. Y
3. Y Though it should say "at least ten other universities" to match the source.
4. Y
5. Y
6. Y
7. Y
8. Y Though instead of saying "the most prominent" it'd be more accurate to say that it has the most issues.
9. Y Though it says "studies" plural.
10. Y Though it says the title of the article was "Some Basic Understandings About Folk Literature and Arts".
11. Y
12. Y But maybe specify that the society was unofficial.
13. Y
14.   MDPI is known as a predatory publisher, so I'm not sure if it's a great idea to cite one of its journals here.
15. Y
16. Y Though I would say "vice chief editor" is a slightly different thing than "chief vice editor".
17.   See above.

• @Vigilantcosmicpenguin: Okay! Thank you very much, I think I got to everything. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 03:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

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.