Talk:Shanthi Kalathil/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 06:05, 14 July 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

Dr. Swag Lord: Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk · contribs) Hi, I’ll try to review this article later on. 03:16, 8 July 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 (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Concern: Okay, let's start with addressing the elephant in the article: it's quite short. That goes without saying. Also, it relies heavily on primary sources. But this isn't really the nominator's fault. After doing a check, there isn't a whole lot of secondary sources on the subject. However, I still think there's room to broaden the article:

This source has lot's of info on the subject's parents/upbringing. Please incorporate in the article. [1]
You might as well merge the personal life and education sections
For the Views on diplomacy and democracy section, I would axe this section completely as it's just two long primary-sourced quotes. Instead, look for secondary examinations on the subject's views. I found a great deal of scholarly analysis on the subject's Open Networks, Closed Regimes book: [2] [3] [4] [5]. Please incorporate in the article.

Other changes:

Lead:
- " international affairs practitioner" --> "foreign policy expert"
- " journalist" --> "former journalist"
- "human rights advocate" --> let's not clutter the lead sentence too much. Remove this. Instead, write that she's an expert on human rights somewhere else in the lead (I saw a source that stated that)
Education:
- comparative politics --> link
Career:
- Things like Biden administration and NSC (needs to be fully spelled out) need links. I know it's linked and spelled out in the lead but we ignore that.
- democratic development, the information environment --> also link this to something
- Wall Street Journal Asia --> italics

I'm going to put the article on the standard 7-day hold so you can expand it and fix the other problems. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 18:29, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for these notes, @Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d. W9793 (talk) 00:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d - I've addressed most of the issues raised - please let me know if you think further revision (e.g. expansion) is needed. Thanks. W9793 (talk) 13:56, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it’s better, but there is still room to expand. By just searching through JSTOR alone, I found plenty of sources you can use to broaden the article: [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]. Granted, no one source has super in-depth information (except maybe the council of foreign relation source) so you would really need to spend some time extracting a bit of Information from each source. I would also highly recommend you search other databases for sources. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 19:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I would still recommend you remove that long quote from her testimony. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 19:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some reviews and moved the testimony to publications - I somehow neglected that quote earlier. W9793 (talk) 02:33, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, good. If you can, try to extract some more information from the remaining sources I listed. You can also mention in the early life section Shanthi's mother Lucia Tang is the daughter of late General Tang. After doing all that, you’re going to need to increase the lead by a couple of sentences. The lead doesn’t need to mention everything in the article, but it should include things from every section and give an overall summary of the subject. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 05:44, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, have you done a comprehensive search for more sources? The WP:LIBRARY may be of use to you. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 05:45, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your time on this thus far. Please note that the TaiwanNews article did not include the full name of "late General Tang" and I was not able to find it elsewhere. I have reviewed all the remaining sources you listed but did not think there was information that merited inclusion or reference.

I've tried to further expand the body and lead sections with additional key information I can identify. While the current version may still not be "comprehensive" (as required for FAs), do you think if it still does not meet the broad coverage criteria? W9793 (talk) 04:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, I was actually just typing out how while the article may not be completely comprehensive it does seem to meet the broad coverage criteria of GAs. After making a few more edits myself, I am satisfied with the state of the article. Passing. Congrats! Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 06:02, 14 July 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.