Talk:Andrei Gromyko/GA1

1st GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 15:02, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: found and fixed eight. I unlinked common words such as paycheck and prominent. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:09, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Linkrot: found and tagged one. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ --TIAYN (talk) 15:25, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * When he filled 13 years, Gromyko went with his father to gather money for the family.  filled?
 * After studying for seven years in the fields of vocational and technical in Gomel, ... vocational and technical are adjectives, where are the nouns?
 *  Borisevitsj assured Gromyko that this new stipend would be at same level of the highest paid members of the Communist Party. Missing definite article.
 * Gromyko was quite amazed of what Stalin said, but nonetheless he never visited an American church Poor grammar.
 * Stalin went back and forth as normal and the importance of Gromyko's new office What is this supposed to mean?
 * To officialise his ambassadorship, Gromyko handed over his credentials to Queen Elizabeth II. To officialise?
 * ''The following year they met up again to talk about the World War II, it marked the last time Gromyko talked to Churchil face-to-face because his ambassadorship had recently been revoked." Very poor grammar.
 * When leaving Churchill's home in Downing Street 10 the British press were prying over Gromyko Very poor grammar.
 * Gromyko spent his initial days as Minister of Foreign Affairs solving the problems with his ministry and the International Department (ID) of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), led by Boris Ponomarev. shoudl be something like "problems between his ministry and the International Department" #:: Ponomarev advocated for an expanded role for the International Department, something Gromyko refused.  Please get this prose copy-edited.
 * ✅ - NB: although Ambassador clearly uses the phrase "Ambassadorship" I have edited in line with the request. Chaosdruid (talk) 22:12, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The article fails the "reasonably well written" standard, Poor grammar, misuse of commas and missing commas throughout, clumsy and ambiguous wording. It appears to have been badly translated by someone with a lack of knowledge of good plain English.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * One dead link found and tagged. Google news is not archived so some other source needed.
 * ✅ --TIAYN (talk) 15:32, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I assume good faith for off-line sources, also for Russian. Other sources check out
 * '' "The United Kingdoms now have the opportunity to play a greater role in international politics. But it is not clear in which direction the British government with their great diplomatic experience will steer their efforts [...] This is why we need people who understand their way of thinking"', needs a citation, as all quotations do. Also check the source because United Kingdom should not be plural.
 * The information referenced by ref #67 needs an update as that source is over a year old.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I am not going to list this artcile now as it needs a thorough copy-edit by someone who can write good plain English. Currently it is a long way from the standards required by the good artcile criterion of "reasonably well written.  This problem is throughout, the examples noted above are just some of the most glaring. Please get it copy-edited and then I would suggest a peer review.  Articles should not be nominated at WP:GAN until they are ready and meet all of the criteria. If you are not able to judge this yourself, get a WP:Peer review. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:56, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I am not going to list this artcile now as it needs a thorough copy-edit by someone who can write good plain English. Currently it is a long way from the standards required by the good artcile criterion of "reasonably well written.  This problem is throughout, the examples noted above are just some of the most glaring. Please get it copy-edited and then I would suggest a peer review.  Articles should not be nominated at WP:GAN until they are ready and meet all of the criteria. If you are not able to judge this yourself, get a WP:Peer review. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:56, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not going to list this artcile now as it needs a thorough copy-edit by someone who can write good plain English. Currently it is a long way from the standards required by the good artcile criterion of "reasonably well written.  This problem is throughout, the examples noted above are just some of the most glaring. Please get it copy-edited and then I would suggest a peer review.  Articles should not be nominated at WP:GAN until they are ready and meet all of the criteria. If you are not able to judge this yourself, get a WP:Peer review. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:56, 21 November 2010 (UTC)