GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


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

Reviewer: ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 04:43, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Ah... Mahathir Mohamed. Certainly a controversial person who likes to piss off Singaporeans from time to time especially over the water price. So, let me do the honours by doing a GA review of this page. Given the length of this article, the review will take some time.--ZKang123 (talk) 04:43, 4 August 2023 (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.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
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.
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).
2c. it contains no original research.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
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.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
7. Overall assessment.

Immediate failure check[edit]

I also almost forgot to do this, but I ran the article through Earwig. There are certain direct lifting of quotes of what he had said, especially on LGBT, and his criticism of OIC and Israel. But I further encourage rephrasing some of the quotes instead of entirely lifting.

As of now, no edit warring, though from what I last heard he's in treatment at the moment..--ZKang123 (talk) 08:31, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead[edit]

Done all of the above. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 16:29, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The lead is still way too long. Typically per WP:LEAD it should be four paragraphs or less. The last two paragraphs, which touches on Mahathir's later political career, could be further summarised. Maybe it could be summarised as:

--ZKang123 (talk) 05:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 21:42, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Early life and education[edit]

More to come.--ZKang123 (talk) 04:43, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've done my best to address the above accordingly. Is there still more detail needed here? Arcahaeoindris (talk) 17:09, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok looks good. Though I might combine the two additional sentences of his childhood home together. Like shifting this sentence. "The family home had a single bedroom and no electricity supply." to before "His childhood home was converted to the..." Might make further mention its now gazetted as a historic building.
Also I suggest rephrasing that sentence because it's too close to the source. ZKang123 (talk) 05:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done Arcahaeoindris (talk) 21:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Other general thoughts[edit]

While the article, at first glance, seems comprehensive, I felt there's a lack of substance and depth behind providing necessary context and explanations. Especially under the section of "early political career", which I say would further benefit with explaining the political context of Malaya at the time. Some sections, especially on foreign relations, could also benefit by reorganizing the essential points, such as how ties deteriorated when Mahathir disagreed with Gore's call for freedom and democracy in Asia.

I'm puzzled that the section of his relations with neighboring Singapore is very thin and brief, given he has raised many issues, and that we have a larger section on Bosnia. I felt there's undue weight given to Bosnia over Singapore.

I suggest you could take a look at similar articles, such as Robert Mugabe (who lived nearly as long as Mahathir until 2019), Winston Churchill and perhaps Lee Kuan Yew. The last might not be a GA, but it has gone through significant rewrites to focus more on the important bits.

I might continue reviewing and see if the article can be salvaged to GA. But I do suggest reorganizing the essential points instead of just blow-by-blow accounts and lifting quotes of what he said on world affairs in general.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:31, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: FN99 for Singapore; Mothership is not a reliable source. I suggest finding a more reliable source on his ties with Singapore. ZKang123 (talk) 08:40, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried to expand the section on Singapore and trimmed the section on Bosnia, and also found better sources for Singapore. I'll come back to the other points on political context and foreign relations. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 21:41, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done Arcahaeoindris (talk) 23:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to do further research on Mahathir and Singapore, you might want to check the NewspaperSG. The linked articles on the various disputes could also have more information mentioning Mahathir's role, especially regarding Pedra Branca, Singapore. ZKang123 (talk) 00:29, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just an observation, in the section Return to politics (2015–2018), Lee Kuan Yew was mentioned a few times, sometimes using his full name, sometimes his surname. As the mention of Lee is in close proximity, there is no ambiguity on which Lee is being mentioned, so per MOS:SURNAME, we should reduce to just Lee. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 09:51, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Early political career[edit]

Done. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 22:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rise to prominence (1970–1981)[edit]

More to come.--ZKang123 (talk) 06:03, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 08:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Other comments:

Done. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 13:41, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Early years (1981–1987)[edit]

More to come.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:58, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done.Arcahaeoindris (talk) 08:47, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Exerting power (1987–1990)[edit]

Done although will come back to elaborate on the letter. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 09:01, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 19:56, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Economic development to financial crisis (1990–1998)[edit]

More comments to come.--ZKang123 (talk) 12:19, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 08:45, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Final years and succession (1998–2003)[edit]

More to come.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:48, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Moved speech to section on antisemitism. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 08:35, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign relations[edit]

More to come.--ZKang123 (talk) 03:13, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Arcahaeoindris (talk) 09:37, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A lot more research is still needed for Mahathir's foreign policy during his first premiership. However, this is something I will leave for post-GA.--ZKang123 (talk) 09:39, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed! I'll try and add a bit more if I can during this process, but there are at least two whole books on this topic (here and here) so getting a decent summary will be tricky. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 11:13, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Post-first term premiership (2003–2015)[edit]

More to come. --ZKang123 (talk) 07:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Return to politics (2015–2018)[edit]

Sources[edit]

I see plenty of source formatting issues. Version reviewed.

This is all I can go through, but help check the other half of the references.--ZKang123 (talk) 13:27, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

24 August 2023[edit]

As much as I wish to help this article attain GA status, halfway through reviewing, I regret to say I find this article still contains various ungrammatical and unecyclopedic prose and source formatting issues. The point of a GA review is not to hand-hold editors until their article is up to an acceptable standard, but instead point out small mistakes that help polish up the work; the number of issues listed in my above review was well above the minimum that other reviewers would use to quick-fail a nomination.

Personally, I find this article gives quite a lot more weight to his recent political life than his first premiership. This might be understandable given more accessible coverage, but some details could be better summarised.

I will like to present two options:

These are my general thoughts. The article could still see better polish, and having it copyedited thoroughly would benefit it a lot.--ZKang123 (talk) 00:25, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your thoughts and feedback. I am happy to put the review on hold give it a copyedit in its current form, if you think that would help its chances of becoming a GA.
On undue weight to recent premiership and political career, I will summarise some of the content (especially post-premiership). It's also possible some content can be moved to the newly created article Second premiership of Mahathir Mohamad and summarised here. If this last point is essential for GA status, I would rather it was failed as this could be a big job. Please let me know your thoughts. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 11:36, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I will see how it goes, but I personally very much doubt even in the seven days the article would be polished to an acceptable standard for GAN. Putting article on hold for now.--ZKang123 (talk) 11:43, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see that the article improved significantly. But I don't think it's really in the right shape for GA at this point, as I still find various source formatting issues. The foreign relations section of his second premiership could be better summarised, especially I don't find it relevant of his statement that Carrie Lam should resign, for instance.
I will bring this to second opinion, and see what another nominator would think of this article. I'm afraid I'm still unsure whether to pass, or even fail this entirely given your efforts to improve this article.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:45, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ZKang123, I saw the request for a second opinion on this. I have not yet had time to read through the article but having looked at the first couple of sections I don't see prose problems yet of a level that would prevent promotion to GA. Re source formatting: there are very few source formatting requirements for GA -- see footnote 3 in WP:GACR. I don't see anything in the source formatting that is not at GA standard. I may have time to read more of the prose tomorrow if you'd like more feedback on the prose quality. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:59, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @ZKang123: and @Mike Christie: - did you have any further feedback on this? Arcahaeoindris (talk) 14:40, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From myself, nothing else.--ZKang123 (talk) 02:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ZKang123, I provided the second opinion as you requested. As the original reviewer you are the one who should either pass or fail this. Do you want additional comments from me before doing so? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Oh Im unaware. I thought its the second reviewer who decides whether to pass. Alright, since everything else is good, I decided to pass.--ZKang123 (talk) 09:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.