Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Macau/archive3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 18:19, 26 January 2008.

[edit] Macau

previous FAC (02:34, 13 December 2007)
Check external links

Nomination restarted (Old nom) Raul654 (talk) 02:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Please review the unresolved external links. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Done Thanks. Josuechan (talk) 05:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
  • The culture section is not a correct summary of the Culture of Macau article. A review of Macanese literature and fine art is missing. Vb (talk) 09:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't understand the sentence "Ninety-five percent of Macau's population is Chinese; those were of Portuguese decent, an ethnic group often referred to as Macanese, account for about 2% of the population.[57]" Vb (talk) 09:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Reply: How about this: Ninety-five percent of Macau's population is Chinese; another 2% was of Portuguese decent, an ethnic group often referred to as Macanese. Better or no? Josuechan (talk) 20:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the current improved phrasing: "Ninety-five percent of Macau's population is Chinese; another 2% is of Portuguese decent, an ethnic group often referred to as Macanese.[62]" Vb (talk) 20:33, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Is the image Image:Lisbonagreement.jpg really useful to the reader. It is not resolved enough to be readable. Wouldn't it be possible to find a nicer image to illustrate the history of Macau? Vb (talk) 09:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Reply: Good idea. I got another picture for that section. Josuechan (talk) 20:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
The current image is much better. Vb (talk) 20:33, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Please note that graphics, including coloured ticks and crosses, are discouraged in the instructions for this process.Tony (talk) 13:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now on grounds including 1(b) and 1(c), though the article has been generally improving over time. Here are some broad comments, I can get into the finer detail when I have time to go through the article again in depth:
    • Being a small territory, the article could do with a paragraph on transportation, similar to many of our city articles. This existed in previous versions of the article, but that old content would need to be culled and cleaned up somewhat.
Done. Agree, and a short section on transport is added.
    • The article doesn't mention anything about media (TV, newspapers) or telecommunications. A few sentences would suffice. I also agree with the comments from Vb above about the omissions from the Culture section.
    • The maximum elevation of the land would be worth mentioning in the geography section.
Reply: Ok, done.
    • Almost all the citations in the article seem to be websites. I would like to see at least the history section use citations from sources which are more reliable, such as journals or authoritative books.
Reply: Ok, at least for the history section all citations are from printed sources. (A few cite entries in Macau Encyclopedia, which is a printed book, but online version is also available.) See what I can do about other sections.... Josuechan (talk) 20:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
    • The image caption "The interior of Venetian Macau" needs to be expanded to be more descriptive, at least saying that it is a casino resort. Please review the other image captions too.
(Caniago (talk) 15:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC))
Done. All the captions should be more descriptive now. Josuechan (talk) 07:49, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose for the following reasons:
    1. I think the history section should be shorten and that subsectioning should be suppressed. Many information there are superfluous. For instance: the first paragraph should be tighened up. Is that so interesting to know exactly which prefecture was responsible for the territory of Macau before it became a noticeable settlement. If the name of the first bishop of Macau is important to be cited, it should be said why. If not (what I suppose), skip it. I think the information "The most serious one is the so-called 12-3 incident that happened on December 3, resulting in 11 people killed and 200 injured." is too detailed. The next sentence "The incident angered the locals and they adopted a "three no's" approach as a means to continue their struggle with the Government — no taxes, no service, no selling to the Portuguese." should also be suppressed. All in all I believe the history section has to be much shorter and summary style should be applied throughout.
Reply: The suggestions are taken and the history section is shortened. Now it's more or less the same size as the economy section. Josuechan (talk) 02:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
    1. I don't understand why the section "Healthcare" exists. It seems to me quite natural that Macau has a series of hospital and an healthcare system. If this section is required, the authors should explain why this healthcare system is so particular and worth being mentioned. Vb (talk) 20:46, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Reply: Honestly, I don't understand it either. The information in the healthcare section is moved to a new article Healthcare in Macau. Thanks for the suggestion. Josuechan (talk) 02:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Oppose—1a, although after the pre-emptive drubbing I received on my talk page, accusing me of national bias, I quail. This is worth bringing up to FA "professional" standards of writing; there are good things about the article. Please find fresh eyes to go over the entire article. A few hours' work by a good word-nerd. Here are random samples of what I mean, mostly from "History".

  • Infoblot—"m" means "metres", not millions. In any case, please use "billions", which is simpler. "Chinese" refers to Mandarin, does it, or Cantonese?
  • Recorded ... recorded. The right to ... the right to. Please audit the whole article for ungainly repetitions.
  • "carry out trading activities" = "trade"?
  • "they obtained a temporary permission"—remove one word. "in order to"—remove two words.
  • "stone-houses"—no hyphen, I think.
  • "Since then, more Portuguese settled in Macau to engage in trading activities"—"Since then" means right up until now. There's that "trading activities" again.
  • 1774—1852 should have an en, not an em dash. "Today only the southern stone façade was left." No, "... facade remains." Tony (talk) 07:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.