Talk:Visayans/GA1

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

Reviewer: Utcursch (talk · contribs) 00:14, 22 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Infobox
 * Images in the infobox should be removed per WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES: "Articles about ethnic groups or similarly large human populations should not be illustrated by a photomontage or gallery of images of group members"
 * The reference cited for religion stats is only for Central Visayas, and does not support the numbers presented in the infobox. Also, people belonging to other ethnic groups probably live in this region.
 * Terminology
 * First paragraph ("Kabisay-an refers both") is unsourced.
 * History
 * The relationship between modern Visayans and others (Austronesians / Hindus / Buddhist / Arabs) is not clear. Did these people contribute to the Visayan ethnic gene pool? Or was their role limited to cultural influence?
 * No page number for David Paul Zorc reference.
 * This source does not support the content it is cited for. It calls the Sulundon the only indigenous group of Western Visayas. It does not state that they are the only ones who maintain pre-Hispanic Visayan culture and beliefs among all the Visayans.
 * This is a self-published source – not acceptable in a good article.
 * This source is almost like a press-release for an event, and does not directly support the statement it is cited for.
 * This is a blog post – again not acceptable per WP:SPS.
 * This source does not support the entire paragraph it is cited for.
 * The source The War against the Americans does not have any page number.
 * This is a dead link. The archived page does not have any author – again, not an optimal source by WP:RS standards.
 * This is a dead link.
 * This is a dead link.
 * No page number mentioned for F. V. Aguilar (1998).
 * This is a dead link.
 * No page number mentioned for B. McAllister Linn (2000).
 * No page number mentioned for K. T. Chee (2010).
 * Last two paragraphs in the Modern age section are unsourced.
 * Language
 * The table appears to be unsourced.
 * Culture
 * No page number for Abueg, E. R.; Bisa, S. P; Cruz, E. G. (1981).
 * No page number for A. R. Guillermo (2012).
 * No page number for Aguilar, F. V. (1998).
 * No page number for Tarling, N. (1992).
 * Festivals: Much of the first paragraph is unsourced.
 * and are archived dead links, and I wouldn't consider these as reliable sources. These are tourism advertisements.
 * is a dead link.
 * "It was found by Filipino polymath..." paragraph is unsourced.
 * This is a blog post, not a reliable source
 * – dead link, and not a reliable source
 * Much of the Cinema, television and theatre section is unsourced.
 * These seem to be self-published sources: [ http://people.bethel.edu/~shenkel/PhysicalActivities/Rhythms/Tinikling/TinikleIdeas.html]
 * Much of the Visual arts section is unsourced.
 * General comments:
 * References are a major problem in this article. Many of the sources are dead links, accessible only through archived URLs. Also, most of the sources are offline, so I'm unable to verify them. It'd be nice to have Google Books / other online links. At least some of these sources are available online. E.g. Antique revives Binirayan festival
 * It is not clear from the article if the Visayans are the only ethnic group inhabiting these islands (I believe this is not the case, considering that the article says "not all speakers identify themselves as ethnically Visayan"). If not, the relevance of some of the content to the Visayans as an ethnic group needs to be highlighted. This content includes the text contained in the sections Federal State of the Visayas, American colonization, Modern age, Present-day (population) etc. This information does not seem to be specific to Visayans as an ethnic group – it is about the Visayas, the geographic entity.

utcursch &#124; talk 00:14, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Failed "good article" nomination
This article has failed its Good article nomination. This is how the article, as of March 28, 2016, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?: ✅
 * 2. Verifiable?: ❌
 * 3. Broad in coverage?: ✅
 * 4. Neutral point of view?: ✅
 * 5. Stable?: ✅
 * 6. Images?: ✅

The main problem with this article is sourcing. As noted above, some of the references do not support the assertions made in the article (e.g. the ref about religion only talks about Central Visayas, not Visayans in general). A lot of the content in the article is unsourced or improperly sourced (e.g. dead links and missing page numbers). Also, the article needs to make a clear distinction between Visayans as an ethnic group or as a geographical identity -- some of the content seems to be about Visayas, the geographical division, and not necessarily related only to the Visayans, the ethnic group.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far. — utcursch &#124; talk 00:58, 28 March 2016 (UTC)