Talk:Death of Li Wangyang/GA1

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 21:19, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I'll review the article.


 * review
 * So far there is one dead link (marked)
 * Hu Jia needs disambiguation

(will continue)

MathewTownsend (talk) 21:19, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "The uproar in Hong Kong is said by commentators have put pressure on mainland authorities to order a criminal investigation" - is there a word missing? Is there a reason for the passive voice?


 * "counterrevolutionary propaganda and incitement" - I think this counts as a quote that needs a citation


 * "fearing calls to vindicate 4 June" to vindicate the 4 June 1989 poster? - don't quite get this - he served years in prison after that.


 * "a frequent inmate in solitary confinement" - spent long periods in solitary confinement? Or was frequently place in solitary confinement? (the wording doesn't make clear that it was not his choice - although inmates do ask to be placed in solitary, I take it that was not the case here.)


 * "to observe 6-4". - exact quote from source is "whole nation to observe June 4"
 * what is the importance of that particular date? (other than his pasting the poster incident)


 * "dissident Hu Jia (activist) recommended that fellow dissidents who are frequently arrested and political prisoners prepare a notarised statement" -  awkward - perhaps "frequently arrested fellow dissidents and those who are political prisoners?


 * "HRIC said Li's sister had been detained by police and was taken to a hotel where they were being held." - I changed were to was, but on rereading it, I'm not clear who was taken to a hotel. - or who "they" held in the hotel is.


 * "The Information Centre for Human Rights and Democracy conveyed that" - is there a reason for "conveyed" - does it mean they relayed a message from the family?


 * "apparently against the wishes of his family" - is the vague "apparently" necessary? (see words to avoid)


 * ""Surveillance camera footage showed that on the night Li Wangyang died, no suspicious persons entered the ward except Li's wardmates and hospital staff ... The ward's door was not forced open", and there were no other bruises on his body. - according to source "there were no other bruises on his body" is also a quote. Could this paragraph just say something like "The authorities said X" so it would be clear that the part not in quotes was also from their statement? And clarify the quote/not quote part?


 * "The city continued" - the authorities continued? or some other wording. The city's authorities?


 * "the Wukan protests" - perhaps some slight context - I think this article needs to provide context for readers who are not already familiar with this subject.


 * 'paid the price' - why are single quotes used in some places and double quotes in others. like "suspicious"


 * "According to organisers of the march on 10 June" - what march on 10 June - who were the organisers? (I've become bogged down in detail.)


 * "Several representatives to the National People's Congress", next sentence: "Several staunchly pro-establishment legislators argued against" - repetitious


 * "unnecessary" - why is "unnecessary" in quotes - that can't be worded so that is not plagarized/copvio?


 * "It is claimed that the entire process " who claimed? Also "claimed" is one of the words to avoid per WIAGA criteria.


 * "The writer lamented" see above "words to avoid"


 * "Self-censorship concerns were raised in the Chinese-language press" - why passive voice?


 * "Pundits" - who are the "pundits" here?
 * summary
 * This article is quite interesting but also hard to follow. I wonder if there is a way to provide more context and overview, and perhaps less specific detail. I'm not clear what the ultimate effect of this is, aside from others making statements. Also, the article is not primarily on Li Wangyang (readers learn little about him personally - this is not a biography) but rather somewhat on the circumstances of his death and mostly on the subsequent reactions. I suggest that the article be renamed.

MathewTownsend (talk) 16:24, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

This article fails. The nominator has not edited the article since June 26 when he moved the page. None of the other concerns have been addressed. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:03, 11 July 2012 (UTC)