Talk:Jean-Chrysostome Weregemere

Source

[1] -Indy beetle (talk) 07:20, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jean-Chrysostome Weregemere/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs) 11:49, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'll review this for GA. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 11:49, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

Well-done article about an intriguing figure.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Well-written article, for the most part, you need to work on the prose a bit more. The short sentences create a choppiness; I suggest that you vary your sentences. For example, vary the length of your sentences and structure them differently. I can help with that, if you like. Or even better: ask another editor who's an expert about the topic to copyedit.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Most of the sources are off-line or in non-English languages, so I'll AGF, since with this kind of topic it makes sense that you'd rely on those kinds of sources.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Not knowing much about the topic, I'll AGF here, too. It appears to fulfill this criteria.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   I noticed from the history that there have been some recent copyedits in the past few days. I suggest that you continue, if you haven't finished yet.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   No images, but I suspect that's because there's simply none available to use. I wonder, though, if you could include some maps or images of some of the towns and regions you refer to. Or images of some of the figures you mention? I'm not requiring it, since GA doesn't require images especially if there aren't any suitable ones, but it's just a small suggestion.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I've made a few small suggestions below, which you can ignore if you like, since they fulfill the criteria for a GA. I'd like you work on your prose and do a little more copyediting before I pass it. You're almost there, though.

Suggestions

• See above for prose suggestions.
  • I've done my best; I think attempts to make non-fiction prose "more appealing" often do so by sacrificing the information's neutrality and accuracy, so my revisions may seem rather mild. Specific suggestions are welcome. A problem I've found in this content area, African political bios, is that there's typically little information other than a year and a fact, so text will come close to resembling a pattern of "In 1986, Mr. X did Y." As for consulting "an expert about the topic" [secondary Congolese politicians of the 1960s], I'm afraid you're looking at the closest you can get on Wikipedia.

Thanks for the explanation. Sorry, I should've said "another expert". All articles have their challenges; how you've dealt with this article's challenges (and I sure others) is commendable.

• Is there no link for CEREA?
  • Nope. It could be redlinked, as though it was a minor party, it did have some significance in the first years after Congolese independence.
• What was his wife's name and why was she elected in Weregemere's place?
  • Not given and not clear; Morrisett writes, "After the riots of early 1959 the Belgians had come around to agree to belated token elections in the provinces, and Weregemere's name was put up for the municipal council in Bukavu. His wife stood in his place, and was elected in December by a great majority, even though Weregemere himself had urged boycotting these elections."

Hmm. Well, don't get me started on that! ;)

• Ref 5: I wasn't able to find the source; the pages are numbered differently in the original source. Could you point it out for me, perhaps by line and paragraph number?
  • If you mean Merriam, I used the numbers listed on the lower corners of the pages in the book, not those given by archive.org (which numbers the cover page and the like). Going off of archive.org's numbers, the page would be 178.

Thanks, I enjoyed learning about such a brave man. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:36, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@Figureskatingfan: Glad you liked it, and thank you for the review. I've responded to your comments. -Indy beetle (talk) 21:56, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm satisfied with your response, so I will pass this article. Congratulations, and keep up the good work with these articles. I'm sure this topic is a very neglected one. Cheers, Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 12:53, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

104 years old?

Is Weregemere still living, or is his date of death unknown/unrecorded? Gabrielbodard (talk) 06:53, 5 September 2023 (UTC)