Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Belarus/archive3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates‎ | Belarus

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zscout370 (talk | contribs) at 18:31, 20 October 2007 (copyedit in progress). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Belarus

After some extra cleanup on the external links, dead links, photographs, typos and red link smashing. I believe the article is ready for FA status. There has been grammar work applied to the article, but there could be a few that either I or others have missed. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Object: The image Image:Khatynstatue.jpg is used under a claim of fair use, but it seems to me that it's quite possible to make a free-licensed replacement; and in any case, it doesn't add much to the article. --Carnildo 05:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Comment Informative and comprehensive, with a clear and confident style. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 20:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A very comprehensive and informative article with a strong intro (though the string of city names reads like a shopping list; perhaps a bit of info on the main ones?). However, the sentence lengths get longer and longer and their structures more and more complicated as the article progresses. I'd really like to see some of these broken up into shorter, more easily digestible, pieces. An explanation of why it's called "white" would be good, perhaps with some info on the unwikilinked kings (or add wikilinks?). Good luck. It's very promising, just not quite there yet. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 06:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • To clarify, I meant within the body of the main article. It needn't be long and it's interesting stuff. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 07:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will see what I can do; however, I have just been informed that some of my sources have been password protected from viewing. I will need to rectify that and flesh that out quickly. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:38, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I removed the URL's (and one section), so that is taken care of. That should give me enough playing room to write about "White Russia," but it will be another 14 hours or so before I actually get that done. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 13:46, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found a book that described where the name came from. I have added that and the source to the article. I know it is not much, but that is all I can find. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:24, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeSupport - Please remove the left wing code word "neo-liberal" from the reference to the sponsorship of the US State department of NGO's that support democracy and the free market. This is often used by liberals as a perjorative, and those opposing tyranny shouldn't be libeled. Judgesurreal777 16:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Removed. I am not sure what a good term should be used for the article, but here is the context. In the late 1990's, the US Government has been providing grants to groups who support democratization efforts (later in 2004, they began to support anti-Lukashenko groups). I wonder how can I word that. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would be good, just explain it with a little more detail so there is no misunderstanding. Otherwise, good job! Judgesurreal777 16:46, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would have provided examples of funding received, but I changed some of the wording so it was clear. Thanks for the support. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Haven't read through the content, but from a presentation point of via the forced pixel sizes on images need to be removed as per WP:MOS#Images, and the scrolling feature of the references section would best be removed as seems to be the norm for most articles. (Caniago 06:05, 4 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]
    • I'll fix the first part now; the scrolling references was just added while I was at classes. I'll think about that part now. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:07, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment In addition it is overlinked - there is no need for links to things unrelated to the country like meters. It needs a cleanup. Also, I notice that some units are not as per WP:MOS, eg. temperature ranges. See other FAC countries for the correct approach (eg. Indonesia) (Caniago 06:11, 4 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]
    • Most of the measurements were fixed using AWB by other users (I don;t use the scheme myself). I admit I need to spend time reading the MoS, since that was one of my least concerns when making the article. I'll fix it, don't get me wrong, but I could use your help. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ok, the scrolling text was removed. If I can honest with you, I will try and remove some of the linking, but I wish to keep meter and things like that. I believe units of measurements should be explained. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Removing now. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Object - I'm working through giving it a bit of a copyedit, which it needs, and some typos etc. I'll come back to it later. The lead is supposed to summarise salient points of the article - thus this would need population, language spoken and ethnic mix all in the lead at a minimum. More later. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Object in terms of content issues there are some things missing from the article and content which needs to be restructured. Here are some initial points:- (1) I don't see any details of the military (2) the article doesn't describe the structure of the court system below the supreme court level (3) the paragraph on religion in the Culture section needs to be moved to Demographics. (4) I'd like to see something quantitative about the languages spoken (5) citations seem a bit thin, key facts and whole paragraphs are missing citations (6) culture is missing details on literature, film, TV, etc (Caniago 09:38, 4 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Yeah, I agree with Caniago, though I think this can get over the line with not too much work. I'll keep an eye on it and try to help out, and strike out issues as they're addressed. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I moved the religion bit, as you asked. I also added some to the lead. I got some on the literature earlier, including the various theatre companies. I need to look at film and TV. I think I can provide more about the languages spoken. I can maybe write details on the military, but where should I put it? A new header? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 13:49, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd put it as a subheading under politics I think, though I don't feel too strongly on this one. Actually there's a lack of subheadings in the article but I agree some can be tricky to place (where do you draw lines in the history section, which is a big chunk of text with no subsections). I'd flesh out the history a bit so it can be split into subsections without looking too stubby. Looking at it again it just occurred to me there's nothing about current radiation levels and fallout from Chernobyl. I remember being in Minsk in 1995 and getting a guidebook which showed how much of the country was affected and what you should avoid doing in those areas (!). I see there is already a bit on the geography sub-page so it should be pretty easy to import. It is a pretty important issue.
To summarise, I can shift to support once I see the environment and media stuff in and maybe a few judicious subsections here and there. I'll look over the copyediting latercheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The convention I believe for many (most?) other country articles is to have a top level Foreign relations and military section, otherwise the Politics section ends up being too bloated. (Caniago 16:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Sounds good to me; I've not been involved with many country articles yet on WP. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a foreign relations section, it is in the government section. I can make the sub heading and put a paragraph on the military. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:20, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to wait on the military section; my internet doesn't seem to cooperate with me. However, I did add some more about the Chernobyl stuff in the geography section. I am not sure if I need to add more in the population section, mostly for health consequences of the incident. Media...hm...I need a section about that. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:53, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I got media started; I will include a section about press freedom, since that is very important to add. However, I am still having some internet issues, so I will push this off until Friday afternoon or evening. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:36, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looking good, I was just about to ask about freedom of media and am glad to see the mention above. I will continue to massage the text a bit in the meantime. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Press freedom added. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing, from what I found in the State Constitution, there are no local courts. All of the courts are controlled by the national government. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 07:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also added a bit about the languages and provided a cite for the official languages bit. Do you need numbers of how many people speak Belarusian, if so, I can import it from the article on the language. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I think its a great idea given the status of Belarusian WRT Russian.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I found the numbers from a national census in 1999 and now in the article. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:18, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment currently I have few points to address:
During his rule, Lukashenko has implemented Soviet-era policies, despite objections from Western powers. Word rule is not neutral and should be changed, presidency would do.
Over 80% of the population are native Belarusians, but you can still find Russian and Polish population centers in parts of Belarus. I am not sure if formulation but you can fits the best here.
The first known use of the term "White Russia" to refer to Belarus was in the late sixteenth century by Englishman Sir Jerome Horsey. He used the term to describe areas of Ivan the Terrible's empire. Could contributors provide original citations form quoted source in order clarify formulations, I gave some doubts here.
In the early parts of the This personal union eventually resulted in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, a federation created in 1569. caps This probably unnecessary.
Words Byelorussia/Belarus should be synchronized thought the whole text (apart from explanation needs)
The Belarusians were converted to the Russian Orthodox Church after Belarus was taken from Poland after the Partitions of Poland. Belarus was never in Crown's disposal.
Since 2004, Belarus has been sending artists to the Eurovision Song Contest. Is Eurovision Song Contest so important to mention it?
Probably union with Russia Federation should be explained in better details, as this union is quite a phenomenon in region. M.K. 13:14, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Working on them. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:56, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I got most of them. I am keeping the Eurovision stuff in the article since I have not been able to find much about the music. I expanded the section of the Russia-Belarus Union. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:18, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see, I also redraw opinion on Euro Vis. per comments. However I can not extend my support until historical inaccurate formulation (sentence with was taken from Poland) exist in article. M.K. 14:35, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good - I'd keep Eurovision in too as it's pretty notable. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Casliber, did I miss anything that you stated? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Um, is this disappearance of several journals or "journalists"? cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also needs a few lines on the whole issue with the flag (with a link to the flag article). I was there in 1995 after the flags changed and folk were bemused as most that I spoke to reported voting for the "Pork chop" which was the affectionate name for the red-white-red flag.

Sorry about extra things as they come up as I go. Nearly there. I'm continuing to fix prose thingies. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:02, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it is supposed to be journalists. As for the flag issue, I am not sure if you saw this featured article. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Done cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object, however the article is moving in the right direction. Here are a few things to take care of (1) citations are still lacking on some facts which may be challenged (2) all citations needs to be cleaned up. Some web cites are missing access dates, and books are missing ISBNs. Probably best to use the citation templates for all cites to ensure formatting is consistent. (3) the religion subhead should be removed. (4) most of the citations seem to be websites. For an article as important as a country I would have expected the use of more books. At the very least all sites used need to be scrutinized carefully and any not recognized as being an authoritative source replaced with something better. (5) I'd like to see details of the major trade partners and commodities (6) the images placement could be improved by putting some images on the left side of the page. See Indonesia for an example. (7) Encarta says the country has "state control of the arts", which is an important point. Literature also doesn't seem to be mentioned. (Caniago 12:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Actually ISBNs are optional per WP:CITE. --Victor12 18:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I plan on keeping the ISBNs. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:05, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lets see, I am having others go thru the article and adding cite to anything and everything. I either gave them cites or removed them from the article. Working on the cite bit now, going to check to see if all links are active. Three has been done, trying to get more book citations. Images, I am happy with the image placement, since a lot of the changing of the article format was done when I was sleeping and it looks alright now. Working more on the arts. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:15, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could not find a non-encyclopedia link about total control by the Ministry of Culture, but I found one example of their direct financing of culture events. Still working on the literature bit, but I need a break. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Major exports and industries were already in the article, added a section on trading partners. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And I checked the links for citation dates and they are completed. I am not sure who was the one who put the links into the cite news format, but I will keep that in mind for future edits. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:39, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am using http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/makeref.php to help me put everything in a proper and uniform format. If anyone here wishes to help me on this, that is your decision. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:52, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • SupportWeak object. Great article, but some important claims are missing inline citation (sorry if my recent edits look a bit like tag spamming). -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:05, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nah, it is not tag spamming. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • All citation issues in the econ section are taken care of. Once I sleep and get home from class, I will try and tackle more of the bot suggestions, which were made on the talk page of the article. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Another good article in series about Belarus. --Avala 15:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggestions to attain support. Consider splitting military and foreign relations into two. Beef up military section. Use one style of dates, not 23 February 2003 and March 12, 1990. Mention of #1 export, what is it? Minor rearrangement of pictures to where they are related to the text. Any old maps of previous borders? I think most country articles, if well written, deserve a FA. Mrs.EasterBunny 22:58, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I do not have enough English sources that meet {{WP:RS]] that could expand the military section. The picture re-arrangement was done to meet the MOS and if I shifted them, they will break the text. In the history section, we have historical from early history to 1920. Machine building, such as tractors and defense equipment, is the top export. I'll fix the dates. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I am still working on the date format, but I believe that is a Wikipedia setting. I did the military thing as you suggested, but I am not sure how much I can add. I do not have accurate numbers of numbers of servicemmebers and officers in the Belarusian military. I also do not have an accurate list of of what equipment is used. I can list NATO cooperation and possible membership. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I left messages at the talk pages of Mrs.EasterBunny and Caniago about the FAC and the fixing of their objections. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:53, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments on the History section I've tried to read carefully the History section and here are some suggestions for further improvement:
  • The first paragraph is a summary of the whole history of Belarus, I don't think this is necessary. I haven't seen anything like that in any FA class country article so it should be removed IMHO. There's no point in having two summaries for the History section, one in the lead and one at the begging of the section.
  • There are two many images at the top of the section. As a result, several paragraphs are sandwiched between pics which is not recommended per WP:MOS#Images. The four images currently displayed should be reduced to just two.
  • The sentence This Early East Slavs gradually came into contact with the Varangians, who organized them under the state of Kievan Rus is not clear. What does "organized them" mean? What was the relation between Varangians and Slavs in the Kievan Rus'.
This still needs clarification. It currently states that Varangians were comprised of Slavs, exiles and Scandinavians. Where they also Slavs? Descendants of Early East Slavs? How did they become separated and when? What kind of ethnic group is exiles? In the following sentence, who exiled Varangians? Why? From where? Who called them back? Why did they help form the Kievan Rus'? Out of goodwill?
  • The Kievan Rus' bit is followed by a sentence about Ruthenian principalities being affected buy Mongol invasions. As those principalities have not been mentioned before, the average reader is left wondering where do they come from and what happened to the Kievan Rus'.
It needs to be clear in the first sentence of this paragraph that the principalities into which the Kievan Rus' divided as the same as the Ruthenian principalities mentioned later.
  • In the sentence Later, parts of Rus were swallowed up by the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, were those the parts inhabited by Belorussians or its ancestors?
What does nine refer to? Nine provinces? Nine principalities?
  • Are the following five sentences about the Lithuanian Duchy necessary? This is an article about Belarus, not Lithuania. It would be better to focus on what happened to Early Eastern Slavs under Lithuanian domination.
Still too much in my opinion.
  • There's too much detail on the hows and whys of the Polis-Lithuanian Union. This seems to me like WP:Undue weight as it strays away from the article topic which is Belarus and Belorussians.
One sentence should be enough for this.
  • It might be a good idea to mention the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk just before introducing the Belarusian National Republic.
  • As a general suggestion, prose needs to be improved. In this section there are several instances of very short sentences and paragraphs. Also there's some repetition of words, for instance:
After the war ended, Byelorussia was among the fifty-one founding signatories of the United Nations Charter in 1945. After the war, the Byelorussian SSR began a process of rebuilding, with help from Moscow.
Even if it has been copyedited before, prose in this section and the whole article needs improvement.
  • Also, try to avoid using passive voice as much as you can.
  • In this sentence: a policy of Sovietization was started to prevent Byelorussian SSR from influences by the West, "prevent" should be replaced by "isolate the".
  • The bit about sovietization needs a reference.
  • The sentence This event has been coined by historians as the "cultural Chernobyl" reads like POV and seems irrelevant. It'd be better to remove it.
  • The bit about Chernobyl should be in an independent sentence, not in parenthesis.
  • The sentence In 1993, there was an agreement in the Supreme Soviet to reduce its service by one year, so that new elections could take place in 1994 seems unrelated to the rest of the paragraph. It could be removed IMHO.
  • Sources for this section could use some improvement. Most of them are web pages or encyclopedias. Can you replace at least some of them with books dealing with Belorussian history. Books on Vikings (Varangians), World War I and the Soviet Union should also be useful and easy to access.
That's it for now. I'll try to check the rest of the sections on the following days. --Victor12 18:45, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm about halfway through your comments. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
About comment five, I have the following in the article: "Of all the lands held by the Duchy, nine were settled by the ancestors of the Belarusian people." I had written what happened to the Kievan Rus lands, but it was removed by another editor. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing, some of the websources I have used include book references that they used in order to create the website and/or paper. Still looking for books, manage to find about 1 or 2 each day. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:35, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've made some further comments based on your recent edits. The section has improved but still has some way to go. It might be a good idea to find someone to help you with copyediting. Good luck. --Victor12 22:52, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Some who have commented here earlier has worked on the copy edits, but i'll find more. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clarified the Varangians stuff. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also trying to trim the Lithuania stuff. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About the grammar issue, it seems that everyone hates my use of the English language. Fair enough; it has been my Achilles heel when making Featured content. So, what I did is I placed an announcement for help at [1]. They could catch things that me and others could not. I am still keeping your other issues in mind Victor; I been trying to find more books in the history and done a good job finding some. Some of them do not have ISBN's due to age, but they are there. If i can be honest, I feel burned out by the FAC. If Victor was at my house, he could see my hands pounding the keyboards and cans of Pepsi just sprawled around on the floor. Hands were shaking, bitting my hand. Enough about my crazy life. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 08:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Galena11 from the League of Copyeditors has begun to copyedit the article. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Belarus/archive3&oldid=165888561"