Talk:Death and state funeral of Mindon Min/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ganesha811 (talk · contribs) 15:10, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article, using the template below. I hope to complete the review over the next couple of days. Ganesha811 (talk) 15:10, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Htanaungg: this article now passes GA! Congrats to you and anyone else who may have worked on it. Ganesha811 (talk) 13:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Ganesha811, for your reviews in both articles – about four months ago and now. My heartfelt thanks especially go to Wikignome Wintergreen for the great work you've done – copy editing. Again here, as usual, without your work, there would be no such achievements. I really thank you both of you very much. Htanaungg (talk) 14:03, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! It's no wonder things go well when Ganesha is around to help out. A very useful ally. ;) Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 15:55, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	In my usual manner I have just gone through and made prose edits myself as needed. Please let me know if there are any changes you object to. Pass.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Pass, no issues.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Pass. Well-referenced.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Generally fine and the sources look reliable, but an English translation should be provided for the titles of all the sources. I've all provided. Source 15 (Desai p.2) appears in the wrong place - can it not go next to or be combined with source 14 (Desai p.1)? Assume I've fixed it. Issues fixed, pass.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Pass, no issues.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Pass, no issues.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Nothing else major found in other reliable sources. Pass.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Pass, no issues.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Pass, no issues.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	I see that a Wikignome recently gave the article a good once-over, but assuming their work is done, this is stable enough for GA. Pass.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Images are all available to use. Pass.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	The infobox caption should mention that it is 1903. Done mentioning. I assume there is no better image of King Mindon available? No photographs? I'm afraid there's no, since no photography developed in Burma at that time. Pass, issues fixed.
	7. Overall assessment.