Wikipedia:Peer review/Xiang Yu/archive1

Xiang Yu
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I think that it has the potential to become a GA or FA. I think that what the article lacks most are references and images. I'd wish to hear from other editors about how the article may be improved in terms of structure and content. Is there any information that might be useful, that is absent from the current revision? Please share your views.

Thanks, _LDS (talk) 08:03, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Crimsonfox's Comments


 * | DAB Links - Fix these by pointing them in the right direction, or if that isn't the possible, delink them


 * Refs 8-12 are fully foreign references, I'm pretty sure these need to be changed so they can be understood by an English speaker
 * Those are the exact words used by those people who commented on Xiang Yu. What readers see in the main text are the translations. I believe that's what I should do, as written here. If I'm wrong, then how should I correct it?
 * No, fair point. The way they are now seems good, though you don't need to use blockquote tags in the refs, the mess up the refs section at the bottom.


 * The Family section isn't needed as it's written in prose in the Family Background section


 * Make sure you pay attention to the weasel words (like the one marked in the lead), back them up or remove the speculation (I know you know about the lack of references, weasel words are slightly different though I find)
 * I've removed the last paragraph in the LEDE. The bulk of it is mentioned in the evaluation and legacy section. Maybe I'll restore it later when I find good references. I'll get rid of the weasel words in other sections later.


 * Evaluation and Legacy - I think that numbered list can be put into prose.
 * It'll look kinda ugly if I number the points. How about bullet points instead?
 * Don't keep the numbers when you put it into prose. Each one can be separated by a semi-colon.
 * Sorry, but I don't quite get what you mean. Why don't you do a demonstration or something?
 * eg. In 1964, Mao also pointed out three reasons for Xiang's downfall: Not following Fan Zeng's advice to kill Liu Bang at the Feast at Hong Gate and letting Liu leave; adhering firmly to the terms of the peace treaty (without considering that Liu Bang might betray his trust); and building his capital city at Pengcheng (present-day Xuzhou)
 * You could also use commas instead of semi-colons, I'm not particularly good on the grammar side of things so someone else may want to check it.


 * Rebellion against the Qin Dynasty - There doesn't seem to be much about Xiang Yu up until the last paragraph, maybe it can be condensed.
 * I've removed most of the information unrelated to Xiang Yu, like the parts about the Daze Village Uprising and the early stage of Xiang Liang's rebellion etc. I'll retain some lines because I think they're crucial in providing the historical setting for readers to understand the later parts better.


 * Feast at Hong Gate - "he saw that Liu Bang had beat him in the race to Guanzhong." Sounds encyclopaedic to say "beat him in the race"
 * Reworded as "he saw that the pass was occupied by Liu Bang's troops, a sign that Guanzhong was already under Liu's control."


 * "and intended kill Liu during the feast." missing a "to" before "kill"


 * "Liu Bang left the banquet and returned to his camp safely." - Not sure if that line is needed
 * I've changed that line, such that it now describes how Liu Bang escaped from the banquet.


 * "A large library in the palace that contained many unique copies of certain "forbidden books" was destroyed in the blaze as well" - Not needed, would be be better of in the article for Hong Feast if it can be cited.


 * Chu Han Contention - "Liu Bang managed to escape after his defeat with Xiang Yu's troops hot on his heels." Reword to be more encyclopedic
 * Reworded as "with Xiang Yu's troops on pursuit."


 * Death - "asking the ferryman to bring his beloved" "bring" should be "take"?


 * Song of Gaixia - Not sure if the lyrics are notable enough to have in the article. Maybe explain the song where it's mentioned earlier in the article.
 * I've considered splitting this section into a separate article, but it's very likely to become an orphan.

I hope that helps, I did enjoy reading the article so I hope it improves.  Cr im so nF ox  talk 00:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your review. _LDS (talk) 06:18, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Replied to a couple of the comments you made  Cr im so nF ox  talk 06:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. _LDS (talk) 07:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)