Talk:1997 Constitution of Thailand
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by the Southeast Asia WikiProject.
This project provides a central approach to Southeast Asia-related subjects on Wikipedia. |
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
 |
1997 Constitution of Thailand was a good article candidate, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. Once the objections listed below are addressed, the article can be renominated. You may also seek a review of the decision if you feel there was a mistake.
Date of review: 13 December 2006 |
 |
1997 Constitution of Thailand has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
 |
To-do list for 1997 Constitution of Thailand: | edit · history · watch · refresh |
|---|---|---|
|
||
[edit] Not in search index (as of 5 Nov 2006)
This article has not been included in the search index as of 5 Nov 2006. Searching for "1997 Constitution of Thailand" will not how this article. Patiwat 20:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Auto WP:PR (5 Nov 2006)
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space - between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.Per WP:MOS#Headings, headings generally do not start with the word 'The'. For example, ==The Biography== would be changed to ==Biography==.There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view. For example,- Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
- While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 11 additive terms, a bit too much.
- Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “
Allpigs are pink, so we thought ofa number ofways to turn them green.”
- Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Patiwat 23:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] GA review
As of [1] (the current article during review), here is my assessment of this article per WP:WIAGA:
- (criterion 1.a) → prose needs improvements. Try to ask other copyeditors who do not know about the subject.
- (criterion 1.b) → lead section needs improvements:
- The lead section is still short and does not yet summarizing the article.
- The last sentence of the first paragraph in the lead is a bit odd to mention further successive replacement of the constitution. The 2006 constitution does not directly related to the subject, as the 1997 was replaced by 1991 constitution.
- (criterion 1.c) → please read again about embedded list. The article has two heavy lists: the constitution sections and innovations. You need to convert the list into textual writing.
Conclusion: GA is failed at the moment. When all the above issues are resolved, the article can be resubmitted again. If you feel disagree about the reviews above, then you may submit this article to the WP:GA/R. — Indon (reply) — 01:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
