Jump to content

Talk:Maurice Kouandété/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi, I am review your article for GA. There are some problems with the article but hopefully I can help you through them. Now that I have read it, I am thinking it is a translation as the wording in many places it odd. I am adding my comments below and may add more later. —Mattisse (Talk) 18:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
  • The lead is not a summary of the article, as per WP:LEAD.
    • According to the link you provided, "the lead serves... as a short, independent summary of the important aspects of the article's topic." ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 23:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Specifically, the lead is the following (copied from WP:LEAD):
        • The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. It should establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any notable controversies that may exist.
        • The emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic according to reliable, published sources.
        • While consideration should be given to creating interest in reading more of the article, the lead nonetheless should not "tease" the reader by hinting at—but not explaining—important facts that will appear later in the article."

Mattisse (Talk) 18:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment
  • Lead:
  • So he led two bloodless coups one against his colonel, Soglo and the other against?
  • Are the names of the schools he went to as a child so important that they should be given weight with the information on coups and other information about him in the lead?
  • Remember also, the lead should be able to stand alone in a summary article. A person reading the lead gets the full (if briefer) picture. When was he president and for how long?
  • In the body of the article, you must give the full information. For example, when Soglo is mentioned again you must give his full name, title etc. The body is supposed to contain more information that the lead, not less.

Mattisse (Talk) 03:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
  • Can you get a copy editor to help you out? The prose is hard to understand and the article does not seem complete. You mention names but do not say who they are. The articles provides little context for many of the people and events mentioned.
  • Examples:
  • "When not involved in coups, Kouandété was chief of staff" - this makes it sound like all he did was engage in coups when he wasn't chief of staff - makes the situation sound frivolous.
  • "He began to rebel against superior officers like Colonels Christophe Soglo and Alphonse Alley, along with the Fon hierarchy." - poor prose
  • fon needs disambig + some context as to who the Fon hierarchy was - what what the hierarchy's role
  • "Kouandété seized the presidency, though he was unsure how to wield it." - a presidency is not wielded.
  • "Members of his faction urged the new president to remain at his post, though the general public's opinion on this matter was different than his supporters." - does this mean that the general public did not want him as president?
  • the section "1967 coup d'état" is hard to follow
  • "Meanwhile, France refused to aid Dahomey and would not recognise Kouandété" - why should France aid Dahonmey? - you have not explained any connection
  • "Alley eventually became little more than Kouandété's mouthpiece." - how does he come into the picture at this point?
  • "This time, Maga was not disallowed from campaigning in this election" - how does he come into the picture and who is he?

Mattisse (Talk) 16:54, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
  • "When not involved in coups, Kouandété was chief of staff of Dahomey's 1,500-man army" - I still object to this sentence in the lead. It makes it sound like his whole life was composed of either being in coups or being chief of staff and nothing more.
  • Reworked that. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 01:42, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • You need some information about his personal life. It may be that there just is not enough information available on this individual to make a good article.

Mattisse (Talk) 21:06, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
  • I recognize that you have worked hard to address this article's issues. I think you have done the best that can be done with the information you have. The problem remains that there is not enough context presented for the general reader to understand the politics of the situation, why the country's politicians use coups to attain political power, who the various contenders were and who they represented (besides the "north" and "south"), and therefore how the subject of this article fits into the general history. This all goes to of comprehensiveness in this article. The article as it stands, is about a series of coups, and not a biography of Maurice Kouandété. Therefore, regretfully, I must fail this article.

Final GA review (see here for criteria)

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): Well written b (MoS): Follows MoS
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable c (OR): No OR
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): Not enough background of the political history of the country is given to understand the dynamics of the coups described in the article. Not enough context and and breadth of information is supplied on the subjects life for this article to stand as a biography. b (focused): Remains focused on subject
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias: NPOV
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

You have greatly improved this article. Perhaps you will either eventually be able to obtain more information on Maurice Kouandété, as he sounds like a very interesting man, or obtain more information regarding the coups and reframe the article around the coups rather than the man. If you do not agree with this assessment, please consider a reassessment of the article at Good article review. —Mattisse (Talk) 16:34, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]