Talk:Dhondup Wangchen/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: DCI2026 (talk · contribs) 20:35, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll begin reviewing as soon as possible, and hope to have the review completed in a like manner. dci | TALK 20:35, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

General commentary

I would suggest adding a bit of material to the lead. It probably isn't necessary, given that this is a relatively short article, but it wouldn't hurt at any rate. dci | TALK 12:25, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead expanded. -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Check for grammar/style errors; I didn't find too many but there are a few, such as "his family were". dci | TALK 12:25, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is always tricky, but my understanding is that when you talk about a collective noun as a group of individuals, you treat the collective as a plural ("The choir get into their cars", "The flock return to their nests".) I think that's the case with the family example, as yoking the singular to the plural ("The family was farmers") seems odd here. -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but wouldn't you say "The family was known for its political influence" rather than "the family were known..."? Not too big a deal, though; don't fret about this one. dci | TALK 23:51, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that calling the first section "Background" is the best idea. If you have any more details regarding his early life, adding that into the section and renaming it "Early life" or something along those lines would help. If not, it can stand as it currently does. dci | TALK 12:25, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that "early life" is better to make clear that it's not background on the Tibet situation generally. -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References look good. dci | TALK 12:25, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Image copyright requirements are met by the ones on the page; as the first one serves to illustrate the subject and there does not appear to be an adequate replacement, it is fine. dci | TALK 12:25, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Section 2: Leaving Fear Behind

Not to force the inclusion of unnecessarily repetitive information, but a tad more background info on the Tibet-China situation itself could help a reader who doesn't have much knowledge about the article's context. dci | TALK 12:37, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid adding what might seem like a digression to the text, I added a footnote with some helpful wls. Let me know if you think the amount of context there is enough. I also added a see also to Tibetan Independence Movement. Between the two, it ought to point the reader in the right direction. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:33, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any info on how he came to know Jigme Gyatso? dci | TALK 12:37, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I've encountered it yet. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:08, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you include more details about the documentary's content in this section (such as what is included in the Jigme Gyatso article, but not here)? dci | TALK 12:37, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:08, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where were the tapes smuggled to? Out of Tibet entirely, or just out of the capital temporarily? dci | TALK 12:37, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have too much detail about the route, but I know they ended up in Switzerland. I added a citation on this to the article. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:43, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Check for consistency in the last paragraph; the second sentence seems (at least to me) a bit oddly placed. Could a separate paragraph be used to give the "physical" information about the film - camera, length of interviews, etc.? dci | TALK 12:37, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded the film's description slightly, which may help with this issue. It appears the film itself is now available online. I'll watch it later this morning and see if I can expand further. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:08, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Section 3: Trial and imprisonment

I am not particularly knowledgeable about Tibetan customs regarding names. The article uses two-part names to refer to the subjects throughout the text; I don't see any problem with this as long as you can confirm it's the correct way to mention names. dci | TALK 12:43, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In my understanding (and per here), Tibetans have no family names. So I'm not sure it can be shortened without becoming informal. I've seen various websites refer to him as just Dhondup, or just Wangchen, or use the full name throughout. I've used the full names as it seems least likely to be wrong, but I have no real answer. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you expand on how his lack of a lawyer prevented his appealing - did this occur because he wasn't able to appeal, without a lawyer, or because he was forbidden to? dci | TALK 12:43, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clarified this. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any concrete information on his health? Current information in the article is derived from reports, which it notes and which is perfectly fine, but more definite facts would be nice. dci | TALK 12:43, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, no--or at least, not that I'm aware of. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pass

I'm passing the article; you've addressed my concerns, and it definitely meets all GA criteria. I addressed non-prose criteria in the top section, but can post a full checklist if you'd like. dci | TALK 12:44, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Terrific--thanks for the review. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:47, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]