Talk:Sarajevo/GA2

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

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 16:59, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, i'll be checking this article for review. -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 16:59, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Round 1
The article was FA, but in 2008 it was reassessed and lost its status due to prose problems and the lack of references to support its content. A copyedit was recommended for the article. My personal opinion is that, after reading the article, those issues named in 2008 are yet unresolved.
 * Background

The article was nominated in 2011 for GA, and was reviewed in September (GA review here). The result of the review is incompliance with almost every one of the topics at GA criteria.

The lead is full of references, and some of the statements on the lead are not further detailed on the article body. This must be improved. There are valid maintenance tags on the article (QF). Many of the sections contains references covering only a couple of the statements written on them, and even some sections aren't supported with references. As an example:
 * References
 * The 'Geography' section does not have any references supporting the content.
 * Only 2 references supports the 'Administration' section.
 * The 'Economy' section has only 3 inline citations and a [citation needed] tag.
 * The 'Transportation' section only has 6 references.
 * The 'Cmmunications and media' section only has 6 references, and has a main section template redirecting to Communications and media in Sarajevo, which is completely unreferenced.
 * The 'Culture' section only has 8 references, and has a main section template redirecting to Culture of Sarajevo, which is completely unreferenced.

As a final comment, New York City is not ready yet to be a Good Article, and 322 references support its content.

The prose is sometimes written with a coloquial tone instead of an encyclopedic one. As an example:
 * Prose comments
 * "Sarajevo is located close to the center of the triangular shape of Bosnia and Herzegovina in southeastern Europe."
 * "The proximity of the Adriatic Sea moderates Sarajevo's climate somewhat"
 * "Sarajevo is very windy city" (original research)

Final comments

 * The article fails the following criteria:
 * 1.(a) the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct
 * 2.(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout
 * 2.(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged
 * 2.(c) it contains no original research.

The result
The result is that, per the GA criteria, this article should be quick failed only for the tags on it. Also, prose problems and the lack of references for most of its content makes this article both ineligible and not ready for GA. So, it failed the GA process. I recommend a copyedit, a peer review, and extensive work on finding references for all statements that lack them. Also, cleaning the article of some original research.