Wikipedia:Featured article review/Turkey/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was removed by Nikkimaria 02:25, 20 December 2011 [1].
Turkey[edit]
Review commentary[edit]
Turkey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Notified: Kavas, Namuslu, とある白い猫, Khoikhoi (these four are the only editors with over 100 edits who have been active in the past year and are not blocked), Turkey WP, Countries WP, Western Asia WP, Assyria WP
I am nominating this featured article for review because after a work needed notice last month, nothing has been done to improve the article. Some specifics:
- Many dead links (already tagged).
- Several book references needing page numbers (already tagged).
- Two citation needed tags.
- Some references missing information (publisher, accessdate) or having incorrect information (publisher for ref #144 is not "state.gov", it's the US Department of State).
- Several areas where statistics or opinions are given where references are needed. Examples include:
- "The most powerful of Phrygia's successor..." in Antiquity.
- Population numbers in Administrative divisions.
- Precipitation numbers in Climate
- Why are some references given twice in full detail in the References and Bibliography section?
- Why are these reliable:
- Ref #2, citypopulation.de?
- Ref #104 doesn't link to the correct page, and I'm not sure why an investment firm (if that's what they are) would be a high-quality reliable source on shipbuilding.
- Ref #132, FactArchive. At the bottom of the page, you can see that their information comes from Wikipedia - therefore is definitely not a reliable source.
- Ref #138, Looklex. Looks like another user-contributed encyclopedia.
- Ref #143, 156, 158. Allaboutturkey.
- Foreign language refs (such as #62 and 102) should note the language they are in. Check for others besides these examples.
- Check for WP:ENGVAR, I see meter/metre, program/programme, isation/ization, etc.
- Text is sandwiched between images in several sections.
- Prose needs a go-through. For example, one that just jumped out at me was "Arsacid Armenia, the first state to accept Christianity as official religion had lands in Anatolia." in Antiquity.
To summarize: the sourcing is probably the biggest issue, between dead links, unreliable references, spots missing sources, missing page numbers, etc. MOS compliance (ENGVAR, image placement) also needs work, as does prose. Dana boomer (talk) 13:52, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Opnion:I'd like to see the article as a featured article. But unfortunatelly it needs more work. I know here the emphsis is on style and form; but, I want to give examples of some problems I have seen in the text:
- In ancient history section most of antiquity including Urartu, one of the important powers of the ancient age is missing.
- In Ottoman History section massacre which is open to debate (and not a part of Modern Turkish history) is mentioned as an established fact
- In Republic history section four coups are mentioned. In fact the number is two (1960 and 1980) the other two are crises based on memorandums
- Politics section lacks the names of the major parties.
- The Economy section lacks data about important agricultural products which are vital to rural population.
- Also in Economy mining, energy production and transportation are almost missing .
- In Urbanization section, some population figures are not up to date. Since the figures are given in a template I tried to reach the creator. So far I have no luck.
- Culture section is too short to cover literature music and art etc.
- The article also needs some sections about living hosing and cusine. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:48, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The entire article needs thorough copy-editing for style, grammar and readability, in my opinion. I am happy to help, but I think we have a hard road ahead of us, especially in terms of article stability. Kafka Liz (talk) 06:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The following comment was posted within my opinion and I moved it here.Nedim Ardoğa (talk)
I think the grammar is mostly OK (it would probably only take me a couple of hours to fix the grammar mistakes) but I agree with Kafka Liz above that the article is not very readable. Perhaps this is due to too many small details being included which ought to be either summarised (e.g. only the Izmir population figure is rounded - the rest are quoted to single digits) or moved to the linked articles or both. Also perhaps there should be a section on human resources (probably not titled that) to summarise education, knowledge and skills. By the way does anyone know when the recent census will be published? In my opinion the article should be demoted from "featured" status until it is improved. Jzlcdh (talk) 19:45, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply to Jzlcdh's comment on popoulation figures. Every year Turkish statistical Institute publishes the population figures of the preceding year. They are very reliable. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 09:00, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
FARC commentary[edit]
- Concerns mentioned in the FAR section include sourcing, prose, and comprehensiveness. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:48, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist - Since nominating this article well over a month ago, very little has been done to address my comments above. Problems with sourcing are still the biggest issue for this article. Dana boomer (talk) 16:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist Just a casual scroll through the article I see problems with 1c, 2c and Images. Brad (talk) 18:51, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist per Dana and Nedim. Claims like "70% of Turkish citizens never read books" really do need solid sources. DrKiernan (talk) 22:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.