Talk:Jack Sim/GA1

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

Nominator: 13:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: ZyphorianNexus (talk · contribs) 00:08, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * @Dawkin Verbier, @ZyphorianNexus, what's the status here? It doesn't look like there's been any movement on the article since the initial review. -- asilvering (talk) 00:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. 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):
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Lead

 * The lead looks clear and well written. However, how about adding a caption to the image? A simple "Sim in 2017" for example, would do. The Wikipedia Commons file should have more info.

Business career

 * About the part that says, Sim watched a speech by then-Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong on the social significance of clean public toilets. It feels a bit out of place in the context of his business career, unless it directly affected his decisions and career. You could consider either proving additional context as to its subsequent relevance on his career, or omitting it to streamline the narrative.

Other social ventures

 * Sim founded BOP Hub, a non-profit organisation targeting bottom-of-pyramid individuals at the poorest global income margins in 2011, developing a $10,000,000 building in Ubi. I'm trying to find a relationship between the building and the rest of the sentence. With the way it's currently structured, I interpret it as BOP Hub being the entity responsible for developing the building. Is that what it means? For clarity's sake, I think it may need rephrasing.