Talk:Social cleansing/GA1

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

Reviewer: Antidiskriminator (talk · contribs) 09:36, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

General remarks

 * Source interpretation
 * The article says "Most scholars agree that the cause of social cleansing efforts is a result of "interaction of economic conditions and cultural factors." - That is not what the source says. It does not mention scholarly consensus at all. It actually elaborates " the possible interaction of economic conditions and cultural factors". I think the text should be ammended to interpret source more precise. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:44, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The article implies that in Africa scholars discovered positive correlations between extreme rainfall and murder of witches trough large negative income shocks and famine. That is not what source says. It clearly explains there are many potential estimation concerns that could "produce a spurious positive correlation between extreme rainfall reports and witch killing". I propose to present this information to the readers who could be otherwise mislead to believe that extreme rainfalls will necessarily result with witch killing.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:57, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * MOS
 * WP:UNDERLINK - There are large portions of text without wikilinks.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:16, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:03, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * This article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long – consider shrinking it down. This is not GA request, only an improvement opportunity.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:05, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Disambiguation - The See also section contains one link to disambiguation page (Political cleansing).--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:07, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Clarity of prose - The text of the article extensively uses vague expressions like many or often in, by their nature exceptional, claims about violence. It would be good to use figures instead, i.e. x% of children are abused. Otherwise readers could be mislead.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:26, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * When? - If some 1996 source says that beggars were killed by police in Colombia, it is necessary to put this statement in context and to explain when this happened and what is the situation now? The source is almost 20 years old. Things are not necessarily always the same. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Scope
 * The article deals only with Africa and Latin America, except very short subsection at the end of article that mentions Asia. What about other regions? I found many sources about social cleansing taking part in Central America, Europe, ...
 * What about history of this fenomenon? There are sources about social cleansing taking part in history, i.e. in Soviet Union, Nazi Germany .... ?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Lede
 * After the text of the article is corrected to adress all valid concerns, the lede should be expanded to conform with guidelines at Lead. The existing lede does not properly summarize even the existing text of the article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:36, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Images
 * There are no images in this article. Addition of images would be beneficial. This is not request for GA statu, only an improvemen opportunity.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Related templates
 * There are related templates to which this article should probably be added and consequently they should be added to this article. I.e. Template:Discrimination and/or Template:Discrimination sidebar.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:35, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Failing the nomination - Since no action has been taken for more than 7 days I am going to fail this nomination. This article is exceptionally good work. I am sorry that nominator obviously did not have enough time to address the concerns. I am sure it will be easy for them to resolve this couple of (quite important) issues as soon as they, or somebody else, have some time for that. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:21, 17 January 2015 (UTC)