Talk:Lê Duẩn/GA1

GA Review[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

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

Reviewer: CüRlyTüRkey^Talk_Contribs 04:58, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
OK won't use it anymore This article makes remarkably promiscuous use of the semicolon, and I'd say in most (maybe all) cases it's unnecessary—and probably incorrect. I'd avoid using it unless you were positive it was necessary.

Done Sometimes "COMECON", sometimes "Comecon". Be consistent.

Done Massive overlinking. Please purge.

Done Actually, there's still a lot of this, and an awful lot of repeatlinking. There's a script that's good at captching duplicate links. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:37, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
Done redundant: "in 1930, but was arrested the following year, in 1931"

Done was active? "During the First Indochina War, Le Duan active in a communist cadre in the South"
Early life and career
Done should this sentence be starting with "At first"? I think a comma or something is in order. "South Vietnam. At first in Cochin China in 1946,"
Done drop the comma: "which indirectly decided to split Vietnam, into North and South Vietnam"
Done shouldn't "communist party" be capitalized? "(head of the communist party) on behalf of Hồ"

Done these commas aren't necessary: "by the Politburo, in August 1956, to guide"

Done the comma makes it seem like "his thesis" and The Road to the South are different things: "his thesis, The Road to the South""
Political infighting and power
Done "some"—for example, who? See WP:WEASEL. "There are some who claim"

Done Colon instead of semicolon? "split into factions; one pro-Soviet,"

Done comma unnecessary: "China, in the aftermath"

Done "To strengthened their hold": "To strengthen"?

Done "a protege of Le Duan" ==> protégé
Vietnam War
Done "policies towards South Vietnam. It should be noted that" ==> "...Vietnam, though..."

Done "From 1956-63": need an {{endash}} for number ranges

Done "stating in 1965 that "it is our policy": drop "that"

Done "that "it is our policy that we will do our best to support you."": why the italics?

Done "in the South had to remain passive, and should restrict their forces": funny mix of tenses

Done "Le Duan stated: "Our party is the unique and single leader that organised, controlled, and governed the entire struggle of the Vietnamese people from the first day of the revolution."": why the italics?

Done "he congratulated the Provisional Revolutionary Government of the Republic of South Vietnam (PRGRSV), the underground South Vietnamese government established in 1969, of liberating": congratulated for liberating?
Economy
Done "could not have been more optimistic.": was optimistic

Done "This optimism would prove unfounded": "would prove" ==> "proved"

Done "Vietnam had developed" ==> "Vietnam developed"

Done "Vietnam needed nothing short of an economic miracle to recover.": unnecessary editorializing

Done "rational economic policy-making was impossible.": this statement is a little hard to swallow. Surely this is hyperbole? "impossible" ==> "very difficult"?

Done "Second Five-Year Plan (Vietnam) (1976–1980)": is "(Vietnam)" supposed to be in there? Is there some reason to leave it there?

Done "This, as history would prove, did not happen.": drop "as history would prove"

Done "US$101; it decreased to US$91 in 1980, and then increased to US$99": drop "US" after first usage. In fact, the first usage isn't even necessary (USD is usually implied by "$")

Done "$ 81.6 in 1976 to $ 57.8 in 1980": unlink "$", and drop the space between the "$" and the number
Relations with the Eastern Bloc
Done "would sent qualified": "sent" ==> "send"

Done "The communique also stated cooperation between Vietnam within the "frameworks of multilateral cooperation of socialist countries."": I'm having trouble parsing this sentence

Done "because of the leadership had failed": drop "of"

Done "received $US3 million a day in military aid": drop "US"

Done "He^[who?] attended the 27th Congress": who?
Relations with China
Done "the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) (which China boycotted)": parentheses followed by parentheses is awkward to look at. Could this be rearranged or reworded?

Done "an official greeting but without": a comma after "greeting" would be clearer

Done "that President of the United States Richard Nixon's,": unlink "President of the United States"

Done "to the Paris Peace Accords. Following the signing of the Paris Peace Accords,": cut second instance to "Accords" to reduce repetition?

Done "From then on, China and Vietnam were drifting further apart;: "were drifting" ==> "drifted"

Done "Later on, 22–28 September,": "Later on," ==> "Later, on"
Relations with Kampuchea and the Sino–Vietnamese War
Done Not even a short summary for this section?

I'm working on it; would it be possible to postpone the rest of the review until saturday??? (I've been conscripted to the army - I don't have much free-time during work-days). --TIAYN (talk) 07:55, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Last years and death
Done "He was briefly succeeded by Trường Chinh. Chinh proved to be a temporary replacement: redundant "briefly" and "temporary". I'd drop "briefly".
Political beliefs
Done "manner; "Management by the state aims at ensuring the right of the masses to be the collective masters of the country. How then will the state manage its affairs so as to ensure this right of collective mastery?"" Why the semicolon? Why the italics?

Done "Since collective ownership was the only alternative to capitalism,": "since he believed"/"since it was believed"?

Done "New Economic Policy (NEP)": is there any need for this acronym? It's not used afterwards.

Done "However, those who supported these reforms, saw it as another way": drop the comman after "reforms"

Done "from the Marxism–Leninism": not "Marxist–Leninist"?

Done link "comprador"

Done ""remnants of the feudal landlord classes.": where does this quotation terminate?
B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
As far I as I know, this won't affect whether the article passes or fails, but the article makes extensive use of {{sfn}}. This creates short footnotes with links to the references, but the links don't point anywhere unless "|ref=harv" is set in {{cite book}}, etc

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
"Done where favor was granted to relatives regardless of merit": Is this universally accepted? I'm no expert on the subject, but it sure sounds like something that could be challenged.

"Done ironic since it was the party leadership which had led the country into such a mess": sounds awful POV to me. Reword for neutrality. (removed, why I wrote this I don't know.....)

"Done While the Soviet Union paid lip service to Vietnam, when it came to actual material support, they did almost nothing." (removed, this is actually wrong, really wrong)
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
Done Only one image, which is under copyright, but is tagged {{Attribution}}.

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Done There is only one image. Are there no other possible images that could be used to illustrate the artice?
Done File:Stamps of Germany (DDR) 1979, MiNr 2463.jpg has been marked for review. It was created in 1979, and is almost certainly under copyright. It will likely be removed from WikiCommons when it does get reviewed. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:43, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
I'm satisfied the article now meets the GA requirements. CüRlyTüRkey^Talk_Contribs 03:21, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]