Template:Did you know nominations/Wang Zigan

Language issues

Wang Zigan

 * ... that Wang Zigan, a prominent Chinese paper cutting artisan, was forced to work in a canteen in the Cultural Revolution?
 * Reviewed: I will be reviewing several DYKs later
 * Comment: A class project moved to article space on 13 April

Created/expanded by NNUR06LizaZhang21081235 (talk), NNUR06EchoLiu5090607 (talk), NNUR06ZhangYuxue (talk). Nominated by Graeme Bartlett (talk) at 08:38, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol question.svg First of all, congratulations on putting together your class project! Article is new enough and long enough. However, it reads more like a research paper than an encyclopedic entry. It is overlong on details; repetitive (see repetitive information in Early Life and Childhood sections); is written in a story-like tone rather than a neutral, encylopedic tone (for example, see the long narrative of how he and his wife "fall in love"); starts off with a Background of Papercutting introduction that is overlong and is almost unintelligible to the average reader; and seems to comprise four different articles: Wang Zigan, the history and styles of papercutting, Wang Jianzhong, and Zhao Ziping.
 * Regarding references, the article seems to rely heavily on a primary source, a book by Wang Zigan. Are the Chinese sources secondary sources? In looking through the article, I removed text that was copied verbatim from the source. Please make sure that you are not copying material, but summarizing it.
 * In addition, per Rule D2, each paragraph should have at least one citation, but most paragraphs in this article don't have any. I am unable to check the Chinese references, but I see that many are duplicates and should be formatted in a cleaner way (see WP:References).
 * Since this nomination was made by a non-involved editor, there is no need for a QPQ review of another DYK nomination. However, there is a need for condensing and rewriting the material, focusing on Wang Zigan alone – his life and work. Perhaps you could use the extra material for a new article on Shanghai-style papercutting? Best, Yoninah (talk) 21:31, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Many of the references are from the same book, but have different page numbers. I could repeat the ref for the other paragraphs in the same section that are cited by the final ref.  Though you suggest removing and rewriting I will not do this part.  However I have removed the Shanghai papercutting section to another article as suggested.  This has the unreadable text. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:53, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Moving unintelligible text to a new article will do nothing but spur a speedy deletion notice. Yoninah (talk) 09:10, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The idea is to remove it from this one, but now the paragraphs all have a ref tag. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Wang Zigan is a typical representative of Shanghai-style paper cutting, that's why I mentioned the background. I think its useful. Maybe too much, overmentioned? It shouldn't be deleted, I think. Shanghai-style paper cutting is almost Wang Zigan's style, there is strong connection.
 * It is specifically Wang Zigan's paper cut style that I have written. It's not a general style.
 * "Wang Jianzhong and Zhao Ziping" belongs to the part "development of Wang Zigan's paper cut"
 * All I have written is connected to Wang Zigan, it's not separated.
 * I've tried hard to find more resources, but till now there's no more new finding. I find the articles about Wang Zigan's life are almost the same, and are all written by his son Wang Jianzhong. The only difference is that they appear in different places. I have added one more source, which is almost the same as in the book. I think the book (the articles about Wang Zigan's life inside are also written by his chldren) is a rewritten of the previous published articles .NNUR06LizaZhang21081235 (talk) 12:52, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * There is nothing wrong with a one-paragraph background on Shanghai-style papercutting. But that paragraph and the rest of the article is overlong, rambling, repetitive, and chatty rather than encyclopedic. It needs a good pair of eyes to weed out the extraneous details and tighten up the writing to meet Wikipedia standards. Perhaps you could put in a request at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests? Best, Yoninah (talk) 13:25, 1 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg Issues still present.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:27, 13 May 2012 (UTC)