Talk:Portuguese Renaissance/GA1

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 03:23, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take this review. Initial comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:23, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Closing review
This article has a substantial amount of good information on its topic, and also a pleasure to read. However, I feel it still needs significant work in some areas before it can be passed as a GA.

In other cases, I'm not sure the given sources support the claims. Does this support the claim that " the Portuguese Renaissance was largely separate from other European Renaissances and instead was incredibly important in opening Europe to the unknown and bringing a more worldly view to those European Renaissances"? Other sources seem of questionable reliability, like this self-published essay.
 * 1a. (Full descriptions of the criteria here) The article still needs some copyediting; I corrected a few errors (see history) but haven't done a thorough check. If you'd like help with this, you can put in a request at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests.
 * 1b. The lead needs to be rewritten per WP:LEAD to summarize major aspects of the article: sciences, humanities, etc.
 * 2b. While parts of this article are well-sourced, other large sections of the article are unsourced. Most notably, value judgments and interpretations need to be sourced: "Portugal's unique ability to interact and colonize other peoples", "an incredible flourishing of culture, arts, and technology", "considered one of the most emblematic pieces of the Portuguese Renaissance", " are some of the most famous examples of the Manueline style, and Portuguese Renaissance architecture in a whole", "The Portuguese Renaissance was a golden age for literary works in Portugal", "This type of novel was best personified in", etc.
 * 4. The value judgments noted above also raise some neutrality issues. Statements about something's importance, incredibleness, etc. usually shouldn't be in Wikipedia's voice, but in a phrase like "what scholar Fatima Ramos called 'an incredible flourishing'"

Though I'm not listing the article for GA at this time, I hope you won't take any of these suggestions as discouragement. On the contrary, I found this a pleasure to read and I'd love to see it get to GA status! I hope you'll revise based on the above recommendations and renominate soon. Just let me know if you have any questions, or if there's another way I can help. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:09, 6 March 2013 (UTC)