Talk:Hongcheng Magic Liquid/GA1

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

Under review now: reading phase. Jappalang (talk) 09:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Lede
 * The scam was started in 1983, so why is the second paragraph focusing on 1994? As such, "Around that time" is inappropriate.  What was reported about the scheme in the intervening 9 years?
 * "One of these efforts was to require the scientific authoritative journal Science and Technology Daily to carry an article critical of Hongcheng's invention, which had been previously rejected at several major Chinese publications."
 * "scientific authoritative journal": is the adjective "authoritative" required here?
 * What has been rejected at several major publications, an article critical of the invention or the invention itself? This is not clear here.


 * "his invention became more popular, finally reaching in January 28, 1993 the front pages of a major national newspaper"
 * It is pretty informal to say "an object" reached the front pages of a newspaper. It was featured on the front pages, or reports of its invention appeared on the front pages, would be better phrases.

Hongcheng Magic Liquid company
 * This section is skimpy (three short sentences) and could be merged with "Invention and initial experiments" into "Early history"

Chinese Government reaction and repercussions
 * "the most authoritative newspaper on China's science and technology"
 * This claim comes from a primary source (the Chinese government), and so it should be stated so in the article ("according to the Chinese government").


 * "It publicized the invention"
 * With this sentence coming so soon after "different newspapers carried different proportions of oil and water in their announcements, and used this to make a critical analysis", there can be confusion to which publication "it" is referring to.


 * "silenced Hongcheng and their supporters."
 * Is Hongcheng referring to the company or the man here? If this article is in American English, then the company is singular (and other words must be checked to adhere to American English).  If it is in British English, then company can be plural or singular, but it would be best to refer to the company by its full name here (since there can be confusion with the man).

Fraud conviction
 * "to visit the northeast"
 * Since not all readers are familiar with where the company is located (Harbin), it might be better to append a descriptive clause ("northeast part of China") to the first mention of Harbin in the article.


 * "Zuoxiu asked them to Beijing to pass a scientific appraisal of his liquid"
 * Zuoxiu has a liquid too, or is "Zuoxiu asked them to bring a sample of their liquid for scientific appraisal at Beijing" the intent?


 * "as the country capital would be a proper for such a scientific and universal invention."
 * This has quite a few jargon and words to confuse.
 * Suggestion: "; the country capital has the equipment to conduct a more scientific and thorough examination of the invention."


 * "his invention collapsed by itself,"
 * This invention cannot collapse (it is an object). The ideas and beliefs about his product could.


 * "Hongcheng acquired the status of a legendary figure, because some people thought that it was a case of cover-up or of free energy suppression, where he would be imprisoned not because his formula would not really work, but because of refusing to release his secret formula to the government."
 * I replaced the contraction "wouldn't", that should not exist in an encyclopaedic text except in direct quotes. This sentence is long and snaky.  Split it up, and watch out for the double-negative "... not because ... would not ..."

Political and cultural context
 * "Individual claiming to have "special powers" claimed that they project their Qi out of their body to cure people, and called "masters of Qi Gong", one of them being arrested after causing the death of several patients."
 * This is an incomplete sentence.


 * "The Asian Rhinoceros was being driven to extinction because pulverized Rhinoceros horn were said to prevent impotence."
 * What has this got to do with this magic liquid case (even in a broad context)?

Scientific explanation
 * Uncited section

Grammar
 * There are fused participles (noun-plus-ing), although I consider this not critical for GAs; however, as pointed above, there are incomplete sentences, and other illogical constructs. A reading of User:Tony1 is recommended.

Sources
 * http://www.xys.org/xys/netters/Fang-Zhouzi/interview/chinadaily3.txt
 * Is this transcript truly from China Daily? If it is, cite to the newspaper itself, not this forum site.


 * http://www.facts.org.cn/Views/200801/t75537.htm
 * What makes facts.org.cn reliable?


 * Why are the following two links in the References section but not cited to?
 * http://www.kpcn.org/news/Read.asp?NewsID=4716&kpcn=.7055475
 * How is this reliable? This is a community website, which puts a disclaimer at the end, stating "not responsible for ensuring copyright of article but please notify us".  The author is not Xinhua news agency, but a moniker "Yi4 Ming3 (Idle name)".
 * http://www.bioon.com/popular/Class405/lishi/200505/110865.html
 * How reliable is this site? Anonymous is a detriment.  It is slightly helped by their recognition as a media partner for Bio-expos, and not very much by publications.  The question is: which reliable source recognizes this site as reliable?  Although this is moot if this site is not cited to.


 * It is recommended to read Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches on ways to prove the reliability of sources.

In summary, GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail: