Talk:Robert Mugabe/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: My name is not dave (talk · contribs) 19:07, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Immediate failure check[edit]

Copyright violations -- nothing of concern.
Any pressing tags on the article -- nothing of concern.
Edit wars? -- nothing of concern.

Criteria check[edit]

Lede[edit]

Criteria	Remarks	Pass/fail
Well-written	Good. The prose is written tightly and concisely, with no problematic spelling errors or mistakes. There are no immediate MOS errors.	Pass
Verifiable	The lede shouldn't really contain any refs, and this is the case here.	Pass
Broad in coverage	Good. The lede covers his rise to president, what he represents, what he has done, his early life and views of him. A little nitpick, in the capacity of my own opinion, is that one thing which is missing here, and is prominent, is a mention of Zimbabwe's hyperinflation. But whatever.	Pass
Neutral	Yes! I enjoy the little bit at the bottom of the lede which attempts to represent opposing views of Mugabe.	Pass
Stable?	No edit wars in general.	Pass
Imagery?	There is a picture of Mugabe in the infobox that has no licensing issues.	Pass

Overall: Pass

Early life[edit]

Criteria	Remarks	Pass/fail
Well-written	This section is excellently written, there are no 'running sentences'.	Pass
Verifiable	Owing to the fact that I do not own the books cited in this section, I will good-faith accept them, as the majority of readers here would. Researching around the sources, the authors appear to be reputable and highly respected in their field.	Pass
Broad in coverage	The early life of someone should include information of where they were born, when, to whom, their education and some bits of early career, if the article is big enough to split the main career away. This article meets all of this.	Pass
Neutral	Statements are not taken out of context, they are quoted, and the section does not posit any extraordinary statements or signs of bias.	Pass
Stable?	Yes.	Pass
Imagery?	The image here identifies an inspiration of Mugabe's early ideas that would stick to him in later life. Appropriate.	Pass

Overall: Pass

After reading the section below, I see that the University of London is referred to as London University. I don't believe this is the standard way to express the university's name and I see no indication that it was the historical name at the time of Mugabe's graduation. ^{My name is}not^dave (talk/contribs) 17:19, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have come across the term "London University" before, although it does appear that "University of London" is more correct and thus I shall amend this in the article. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:59, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Revolutionary activity[edit]

Criteria	Remarks	Pass/fail
Well-written	First clause of the first sentence of first section, I would change to "While Mugabe was in the north", or something that is a bit specific as to where Mugabe was when the nationalist movement was founded. I clicked onto this section and found the first sentence a little vague, I had to scroll to find, again, where Mugabe was. Other readers, who may be interested in just his revolutionary activities, may end up getting confused in the same way. Good idea. I've gone with "While Mugabe was teaching abroad", if that works? Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:07, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply] Uh-huh, all good. ^{My name is}not^dave (talk/contribs) 09:13, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply] "Being a teacher who possessed three degrees and had travelled elsewhere in Africa, Mugabe was among those invited to speak to the crowd." - this seems a bit of a non-sequitur to me. I would put the latter clause first and then the former clause last, to give it more sense. @Midnightblueowl: if you have access to the book sources cited here, maybe you could clarify this. If you don't, don't worry. I haven't got the sources to hand, but I remember what they were referring to. Mugabe was among those chosen to speak because he was a teacher (a respected position in society), had three degrees (a very rare achievement at that time), and had travelled abroad (again, very few black Rhodesians had ever done this). It was the combination of these factors which set him apart from most of the other people in the crowd. Perhaps I could change this to "Having become a much-respected figure through his profession, his possession of three degrees, and his travels abroad, Mugabe was among those invited to speak to the crowd"? Do you think this an improvement? Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:24, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply] @Midnightblueowl: Yeah, alright, do that. ^{My name is}not^dave (talk/contribs) 09:13, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply] 'London University' -- see above. Again, changed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:17, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply] It states that the Southern Rhodesian general election, 1980 happened in March. But if you click, it says February. Could this be clarified? In addition, it says that Mugabe was elected for the 'Harare constituency of Highfield' -- but wasn't Salisbury named to Harare after the election and when he came to power as Prime Minister? I've switched "March" to "February", which appears to be the correct month. I've also switched "Harare" to "Salisbury" (well spotted!) Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:34, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]	...
Verifiable	Using the same sources as before. Other ones I have no concerns with.	Pass
Broad in coverage	Very broad. Covers everything you need to know and more.	Pass
Neutral	Yes	Pass
Stable?	Yarp	Pass
Imagery?	Appropriate. Gives a representation of some of the related people during this period of Mugabe's life. @Midnightblueowl: Why do you think the flag in this section might be of relevance though? My thought was that this section discusses the period in which Mugabe secured control of the ZANU party, and thus the party's flag would be appropriate at this juncture. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:29, 3 November 2017 (UTC) \|\| ...[reply]

Overall: Pass

Prime Minister of Zimbabwe[edit]

Criteria	Remarks	Pass/fail
Well-written	Good.	Pass
Verifiable	Uses same sources, mostly as previous. All good.	Pass
Broad in coverage	Very broad	Pass
Stable	Yes	Pass
Imagery?	Good use of imagery, especially showing Mugabe at 1982 age!	Pass
Neutral?	Yes	Pass

Overall: Pass.

President of Zimbabwe[edit]

Criteria	Remarks	Pass/fail
Well-written	All the other L2 sections have some sort of time period after their subject. Why not so here? I don't quite follow; there are year ranges after each sub-title in the "President of Zimbabwe" section?Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:45, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply] Actually, there are a few choices here. Because it is actually the Prime Minister section header which is the only one with a duration period next to it. So you can either get rid of the "1980–1987" bit on the Prime Minister section header or add a period of duration on the revolutionary and President section headers. Or, we could just keep it the same, if you think it works effectively as it is. At this point, its something minor that can be discussed in future, like at an FAC or a peer review. ^{My name is}not^dave (talk/contribs) 09:29, 4 November 2017 (UTC) \|\| Pass[reply]
Verifiable	Uses same sources, mostly as previous. All good. Some new, online ones have come into play here, all from reputable newspapers (no tabloids).	Pass
Broad in coverage	Very broad, shows much of his actions and relations as president.	Pass
Stable	Yes	Pass
Imagery?	Why are there images of him in this section taken in the period before he became president? In addition, at the bottom of the article, there is a picture of him in 2008 and 2011. The one in 2011 is in the wrong section, so to speak. I think that it would be advantageous to choose either the 2008 photo in the 2008 to 2013 section or the 2011 one. I've switched the locations of the 2008 and 2011 images. As for the 1980s image, I acknowledge that they are (chronologically speaking) in slightly the wrong sections, but the time periods being discussed are not far apart and we are restricted by which images we actually have freely available to us. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:43, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]	...
Neutral?	Yes	Pass

Overall: Pass.

Ideology[edit]

Criteria	Remarks	Pass/fail
Well-written	Good -- but the bottom section repeats what had been said above -- "During the 1980s, Mugabe indicated his desire to transform Zimbabwe from a multi-party state into a one-party state." This is relevant to ideology but it could be rephrased since it's not good practice just to say more or less the same thing again. I've moved the paragraph to a different position of the section, although I have not rephrased it; I'm not really sure it could really be rephrased in a manner that would fundamentally eliminate any level of repetition, to be honest. 22:02, 3 November 2017 (UTC) \|\| ...
Verifiable	Uses same sources, mostly as previous. All good.	Pass
Broad in coverage	Very broad, shows a lot of views about his ideology.	Pass
Stable	Yes	Pass
Imagery?	None here, no worries.	Pass
Neutral?	Yes. Uses quotes to reflect upon the many opinions of Mugabe's ideology.	Pass

Overall: Pass.

Personal life[edit]

Criteria	Remarks	Pass/fail
Well-written	I can say for sure that I actually enjoyed reading this section.	Pass
Verifiable	Uses same sources, mostly as previous. All good.	Pass
Broad in coverage	As per above^^ Lots of interesting info beyond 'wife and kids' stuff.	Pass
Stable	Yes	Pass
Imagery?	Good	Pass
Neutral?	Yes. Uses quotes to reflect upon the many opinions of Mugabe's ideology.	Pass

Overall: Pass

Reception and legacy[edit]

Criteria	Remarks	Pass/fail
Well-written	Good	Pass
Verifiable	Good	Pass
Broad in coverage	Shows legacy and reception through his period in power. Good	Pass
Stable	Yes	Pass
Imagery?	Good	Pass
Neutral?	Many views represented here.	Pass

Overall: Pass

Overall[edit]

I am putting this on hold, as there are a few issues that need to be resolved. Most are not urgent, but one is -- the problem with the election stating that it was held in March, when the election page stated that it was held in February. ^{My name is}not^dave (talk/contribs) 11:53, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for taking on this review, ^{My name is}not^dave. I hope that you gained some interest from reading through the article. I think that I have responded to each or your comments; you may wish to counter-respond on a few points before moving forward with the review. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:47, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Going forward, it would be good to see this as a featured article. All in all it looks ready for such a feat, there could be a small reduction in article size, it is at 86k and is 13,595 words long, but this is a well-made article. ^{My name is}not^dave (talk/contribs) 09:34, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]