Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisting per numerous issues, particularly GA criteria #3. No objections (including from the GA nominator or promoter) nor edits to the article since the GA reassessment was proposed. Yue🌙 23:18, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I've never used GAR or any other wikipedia script before, so sorry if this causes any problems and let me know so I can fix them. I've noticed 3 issues with this article upon finding it and wish to bring it to the relevant parties to form a consensus on what to do next.

• 1. For a Political party which was the sole ruling entity of a region for 7 years this article contains literally no information about what the party actually did other than a statement about what the party's main goals are, but again, nothing on what policies they implemented, what were their effects, how were they were recieved or other useful information like what their relationship to the CCP or the Kuomintang was.
• 2. There is information in the infobox which is not included in the article. The women's wing and Youth wing have no references or information about them in the article or infobox
• 3. partially mentioned in the first point but the article is extremely short for a 7 year long which lead a region as its sole political party, Sheng Shicai's and the Province's article is far larger then party's AssanEcho (talk) 02:37, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Delist – I came across this article a while ago and thought of starting a reassessment, but opted not to because I didn't have the time to engage in improving or discussing improvements to the article. Firstly, good articles don't have to be long, and you can only expect coverage where sources exist. That being said, some issues with the reviewed version even are:

  • The lead is too small and doesn't summarise the body.
  • There isn't sufficient information about the prelude to or background of the organisation or the people involved with it.
  • Descriptions of the organisation and its beliefs are mostly quotes.
  • No information about the organisation's activities, policies in action, legacy, relationship with other organisations or locals, etc.

  A harsher reviewer may have quick failed the article on the basis of GA criteria #3; I would have at least asked the nominator to expand on existing aspects and add new details based on the sources they already have access to. Engaging with Chinese-language sources, if possible, would also help with this article's expansion. That being said, such a task isn't simple; it's time consuming and takes a dedicated editor(s). In my opinion this article shouldn't have been passed so quickly in the first place, and it isn't reasonable to expect editors to make this article GA status worthy in a reasonable amount of time, especially given this article's niche topic. Yue🌙 07:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I could have sworn that I wrote in this GAR either in point 1 or 3 the issues regarding the quotes that you just mentioned. Must've forgotten or something. AssanEcho (talk) 17:59, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Governor Sheng and Iazyges: Your thoughts? I realised nobody has pinged either of you two. Yue🌙 08:09, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist Per Yue's concerns. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]