Talk:List of communist ideologies/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 20:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

This looks like a very useful article. Some first thoughts:
 * If this is a list, then it can't possibly be a Good Article, because only articles become good articles. You would have to nominate at Featured lists. However, this does not precisely look like a list to me, so I wonder if the title should be changed? If you decide to change the title, please wait until the review is completed, otherwise we get technical issues.
 * The next bigger (but again not unsolvable) problem I see is the lead. See MOS:Lead, this section should be a summary of the whole article. All information provided in the lead should be repeated in the text. Instead, you are using the lead as an introduction/background section.
 * That brings me to my next point: Better have an actual section "Background", where you can provide more general information, maybe including a general history stating when and why ideologies emerged and to what events they are related, etc. A nice extensive section here to get a good overview, and understand connections, before going into the separate ideologies. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that the article still has some way to go to reach GA criterion 1 "well written". As an example, see the first paragraph of the section "Juche":
 * The paragraph lacks a red thread, it seems to contain of unconnected sentences in a random order;
 * The quote lacks attribution
 * There are incomplete sentences: "Though many critics point out the lack of Marxist-Leninist theory in Juche."
 * There are a number of missing citations (all information should have inline citations)
 * So in sum, I think this still needs quite some work to reach GA level. In particular, the article needs a careful copy edit for language and text flow. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 13:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , hmmm yeah I can see the issues. This is gonna be a lot of work to do, and I'm not gonna get it done in the time frame, so I'll keep working to C/E the text and work on better structuring the article to resubmit for consideration next year (cause an article can only be nominated once a year iirc). --Cdjp1 (talk) 20:13, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, I will fail it then; I also think this might be best, as it just takes away the pressure and commitment. But you don't have to wait a year for renominating, you can renominate as soon as you resolved the issues. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Closing note: Nomination withdrawn. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)