Talk:Portuguese Empire/GA2

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


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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:
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Comments

 * There are several citation required tags in the article some sections having no citations
 * There is a mixture of citation styles see Citing sources
 * See WP:OVERCITE does it need three cites for this sentence for example Chinese children were kidnapped in China, and through Macau were brought to Portugal and sold as slaves either in Macau or overseas.[43][44][45]
 * The images in the Age of Discovery (1415–1542) and the Tordesillas division of the world (1492) section need to be moved to stop sandwiching the text between them
 * Ref 77 is just a bare url
 * All books used should be in the bibliography
 * retrieved dates should all be in the same format some are written as: retrieved 12 August 2011 others Retrieved 2010-07-14.
 * Some web citations 82/83 need titles adding
 * Check wikilinks some names are linked more than once


 * The number of citations still required make this a quick fail. Can I suggest when they are added it is resubmitted. Jim Sweeney (talk) 12:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

2nd opinion
I agree with Jim's comments above. Although there is much to commend this article IMO it is not yet up to GA standard. Another (fairly minor issue) that has not yet been mentioned though is the lead. Currently it has 6 paragraphs, however according to WP:LEAD no more the 4 paragraphs should be used. I imagine it would be fairly simple to restructure using the same text though. Anotherclown (talk) 23:27, 22 December 2011 (UTC)