Talk:Gansu ultramarathon disaster/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: RunningTiger123 (talk · contribs) 23:19, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be reviewing this as part of the July 2021 GAN backlog drive. I'm aiming to have the article reviewed within the next few hours. RunningTiger123 (talk) 23:19, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): 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:
· · ·

Listed below are the major issues with the article that I found. The relevant GA criteria are noted at the start.

1a: There are numerous issues with grammar; for example:
- "collapsed unconsciously from hypothermia" doesn't make sense
- "the two checkpoints are largely..." should be past tense
- "Some among the lead pack [...] and hypothermia" – this sentence is a fragment
- "yet that GPS message was never responded" doesn't make sense
- Inconsistent spacing around references and footnotes – there should be no space before the note and a space after it (i.e., "This is a sentence.^[1] This is another sentence."), but many notes use incorrect spacing ("This is a sentence. ^[1] This is another sentence." or "This is a sentence. ^[1] This is another sentence.")

This is by no means a comprehensive list of the grammatical issues. Due to the number of issues, I suggest that you consider a request for a copyedit from WP:GOCE.

1b: The lead fails to cover all elements of the article. Notably, there is no discussion of what led to the disaster and what the response to the disaster was.
2b: While not necessarily wrong, source 25 is from Xinhua, which may not be a great source for this topic (see WP:XINHUA).
2c: There are many side notes here that are original research. For example:
- Why is note 2 relevant? Is the definition of the karst discussed in any sources about the event? If not, it's not important.
- Same for note 3 – are the time zone distinctions relevant in any secondary sources?
- While the Yangtze river disaster is sourced, the source does not discuss that disaster in comparison to this one, so its inclusion violates WP:SYNTH.
- The Beaufort scale table is also irrelevant, as the cited source is not in reference to this disaster. You should link to the Beaufort scale article for readers who don't know what the different level mean, or better yet, include units such as mph or km/h that readers will more easily recognize.
- The "Similar incidents" section is entirely original research.
3b: Many of the side notes address in the previous bullet points cause the article to veer off topic instead of staying focused on this event.
6b: The caption "A color-adjusted Yellow River Stone Forest which does not reflect its true color" is unsourced, unnecessary commentary and should be removed. (Also, if the image isn't in true color, why was it included in the first place?)
Other notes:
- Duplicate wikilinks in the body are discourage – for instance, you don't have to wikilink trail running every time it appears.
- Similarly, the footnotes only need to be included once or twice. Too many footnotes can clutter the page.
- "甘肃晟景体育文化发展有限公司" should be translated to English.

Due to the number of issues with this article, particularly regarding grammar and original research, I feel I have no choice but to fail this article for the time being. But don't worry – there's a good article in here! With a little time, and some help from groups like WP:GOCE, I am confident this article can reach GA status. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:11, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]