All-China Women's Federation was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result November 10, 2014 Good article nominee Listed April 2, 2024 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Organizations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. China Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Human rights Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Feminism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Women's History Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The existing article is currently rated as a mid-importance article, but is only a stub class article, which means there are several aspects that can be improved.The article does not fully address the history of the federation, discuss the complex relationship between the federation and the Chinese government, examine the ideology and structure of the group, or address the complex challenges facing the federation currently, such as its NGO status. These changes will address the content issues within the article, and I also plan on tackling some of the editorial issues within the article. The article suffers from a lack of academic sources. More sources would address the content issues, and relying on academic sources will make sure the changes are accurate. Some journals I plan on consulting include the International Feminist Journal of Politics, Communist and Post Communist Studies, and World Development. I plan on expanding the introduction, adding sections covering the aspects of the federation I discussed above, and increasing the number of relevant links in the See Also section. This contribution is part of a class for Rice University, so please feel free to give advice or suggestions concerning this article. Shelby McPherson (talk) 03:01, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It may also be a good idea to look into adding a "criticism" section. I was just browsing around for info on the ACWF when I found this remarkable op-ed: "China’s ‘Leftover’ Women". It's not an academic source, but it's written by a doctoral student and its claims certainly seem to provide a potential area of investigation. TI. Gracchus (talk) 09:13, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:All-China Women's Federation/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MrWooHoo (talk · contribs) 02:33, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this fantastic article! I will probably be starting on 10/18/14 at around 13:00-16:00 UTC. By the way, I do my review in a prose+source review format with a main review up front. (Here is an example: Talk:Who Wants to Be a Millionaire (U.S. game show)) Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 02:33, 17 October 2014 (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.	From a first look, the article is clear and concise. However, a more detailed review will be provided in the prose review,
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Everything complies with the MOS, except maybe the lead. Could you try and make it longer, like this article? When you take out the references in the lead, please put the following code under this: : Done -signature- That article has just over 135k bytes. This is at 22,000, meaning the lead should be shorter anyway. Is there anything you think NEEDS to be included in the lead that isn't? --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 14:01, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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.	You can take out the references in the lead, those aren't needed. ("Citations are also often discouraged in the lead section of an article, insofar as it summarizes information for which sources are given later in the article, although such things as quotations and particularly controversial statements should be supported by citations even in the lead," from WP:WHYCITE) Otherwise, the references are good. When you take out the references in the lead, please put the following code under this: : Done -signature-  Done --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 14:01, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
	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).	In line citations correct, besides the lead references
	2c. it contains no original research.	Looks good. Everything is referenced.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	From a first look, everything out of scope is covered.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	The article does not veer off topic. Good ;)
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	The article appears to be neutral, with no POV dominating the article.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No edit wars that I've seen.
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.	Images are tagged correctly.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are relevant to the article, and had suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Thanks to Bentvan54321, the article is now passed. Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 01:08, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: If you have changed the sentence that needed to be corrected, press Enter and start off the line with ::, then use Y or  Done If the change was only partially done use Y, and N or  Not done if the change could not occur. (If you would explain why, I would be greatly appreciated :P) To see code, go to edit source and copy the code.

• History Section

"During the 2nd National Congress in 1922 the CPC issued a statement arguing for the end of Chinese traditions that repress women."

Add comma after the.

Are you sure you didn't mean after 1922? Anyway,  Done. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:48, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"In March 1938 at the First Women’s Congress held by the Women’s Federation..."

Add comma after 1938.

 Done. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:48, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"During the Cultural Revolution the women’s movement..."

Add comma after the.

 Done. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:48, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Organization Section

"The party still does have direct control over some aspects of the ACWF through cadres who work within the federation who may be receiving a government salary..."

Add comma after cadres.

 Done. --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 13:48, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Challenges Section

No issues. Good.

@MrWooHoo: Hey Brandon, are these the only outstanding issues? If so, I'd be willing to fix them, but if not, I'd suggest failing the article. Please let me know soon as I've got a lot on my plate and can only commit to this if these minor issues are all that needs to be fixed. I'll also note that I'm probably not the best person to expand the lead as I know absolutely nothing about this topic, but if typos and commas are it, I'll clean it up. Thanks! --Bentvfan54321 (talk) 03:17, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Bentvfan54321: Hey Bentvfan54321, those are the only issues on the article. Thanks for being a quick nom :) Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 01:07, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• No issues. Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 23:05, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: I changed this disambig link here.

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• All-China Women's Federation.svg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:44, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• All-China Women's Federation.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:52, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• All-China Women's Federation.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:45, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• All-China Women's Federation.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:12, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2023 and 14 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ritalyo (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Ritalyo (talk) 02:49, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the Good Article criteria due to multiple uncited paragraphs. Is there anyone willing to fix up the article? If not, I'll nominate to WP:GAR. Pinging nominator @Bcschneider53:. Z1720 (talk) 01:58, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: Wow, this is a throwback. I'm not the nominator. A user named Smcpherson31 appears to have nominated it in April 2014 (perhaps as a class project, given their userpage?) but the article didn't get reviewed until October (perhaps after the start of a new semester). When a reviewer who had also picked up one of my nominations only pointed out a few minor issues, I offered to take care of them, and the article was then promoted to GA status.

TL;DR: This is not my area of expertise as I myself only saved this at the last minute a decade ago. I'd support a GAR if you think it's necessary. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 02:45, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bcschneider53: I'll send it to GAR. Z1720 (talk) 16:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]