Talk:Ba Cụt/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I'll be revieiwing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
two spots that seem odd
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Specific concerns

A map might help folks unclear on Vietnamese geography figure out the places, but this is just a suggestion for FA.
Question - you quote David Elliot "the most important eventual cause of the French decline was the inherently stable nature of the political alliances they had devised..." but is that a typo for "instable"? it doesn't make sense in the context that he's saying they were stable alliances.
Career section, second paragraph. This sentence confuses me "In 1947, he led his own faction of the sect after its various military leaders took their own separate policies towards the French and Ho Chi Minh's Vietminh." especially the last half. perhaps reword? I THINK you're trying to say that the various leaders followed their own separate policies, but I'm not sure enough to just go ahead and reword on my own.
Someone's going to want a citation for "The French defeat at the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in May 1954 signalled the end of French Indochina." at FAC. Won't hold GA back but just a heads up.

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]