Jump to content

Talk:Minority Treaties

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleMinority Treaties has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 18, 2008Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on October 31, 2007.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the Minority Treaties of 1919-1921, designed to protect ethnic minorities, were not implemented on the victorious allies of World War I?

Good article review

[edit]
  1. The first footnote is redundant. If the alternative names are worth mentioning, they are worth mentioning in the introduction, ie ABC also known as LMN or XYZ. They should also be linked from redirection pages. The footnote also rather oddly references back into the main article.
  2. The treaties were designed to safeguard the rights of ethnic minorities in those countries Which countries? This paragraph needs to be edited so the reader is clear which class of countries are being addressed by the treaties. Also punctuation needs to be improved.
  3. There were several bilateral Minority Treaties signed between the country in question and the League. Did one country have several treaties? Once again this needs to be re-written to show that that League had treaties with several countries, as outlined in the subsequent sentences.
  4. References These need to be rewritten in Harvard format ie Jones, Sarah. 1999 Minority Treaties University Press, London. etc. Also separate out web links to texts of documents from books and journal articles, and it would be nice if authors were in alphabetical order. You can then alter your footnote notations to "Jones, 1999" etc.

Fix the above and I think we can go forward with this nomination. I enjoyed the commentary under "Importance", I thought it well written and informative. Editors might like to see if you can find an appropiate image, not essential, but adds interest to a page. --Michael Johnson (talk) 02:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I've had to pull back from this process. Hope you find another reviewer, and my comments helpful.--Michael Johnson (talk) 04:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it took me so long to get to reply here. It may be a good idea to add a note that the review comments have been posted to nominator page. Re 1. I think the footnote is helpful, clarifying which names were used for what. This article collects info on several treaties, each of which is notable but not all of which presently have their articles; some sources don't recognize that they were different treaties and confuse them, or just speak of unspecified minority treaty (treaties) in general. Re 2. It is very obvious that the countries which signed the treaty. I am not a native speaker, so if the punctuation needs to be improved, I am not the right person to do it, unfortunately. Re 3. This is unclear indeed, I'll rewrite it shortly - it is one treaty per country, several for the League. Re 4. Harvard style is only one of several allowed per WP:CITE, but we need to do some cleanup w/ regards to notes and refs, I'll do so shortly.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 12:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]

Well, I think the above reviewer got it just about right in his comments. However, I would like to add: if you are going to quote a book, quote the specific pages you're quoting them from, not just the book name.

I'll add more comments shortly. Noble Story (talk) 14:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We are quoting page ranges were appropriate, this will become clear as soon as I do a c/e of the notes/refs.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 12:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Noble Story was obliged to withdraw as well. I am requesting that a second editor conclude this review and have changed the {{GAN}} template accordingly. Take care. Gosgood (talk) 14:45, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Passed; all issues seem resolved. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 02:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]

WP:Good article usage is a survey of the language and style of Wikipedia editors in articles being reviewed for Good article nomination. It will help make the experience of writing Good Articles as non-threatening and satisfying as possible if all the participating editors would take a moment to answer a few questions for us, in this section please. The survey will end on April 30.

  • Would you like any additional feedback on the writing style in this article?


  • If you write a lot outside of Wikipedia, what kind of writing do you do?


  • Is your writing style influenced by any particular WikiProject or other group on Wikipedia?


At any point during this review, let us know if we recommend any edits, including markup, punctuation and language, that you feel don't fit with your writing style. Thanks for your time. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 03:06, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Minority Treaties. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Minority Treaties. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:36, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]