Talk:Jack Sim

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jack Sim/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Dawkin Verbier (talk · contribs) 13:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stepping in to close this as inactive. Feel free to resubmit at any point to get a new reviewer. -- asilvering (talk) 00:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: ZyphorianNexus (talk · contribs) 00:08, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. 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):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• The lead looks clear and well written. However, how about adding a caption to the image? A simple "Sim in 2017" for example, would do. The Wikipedia Commons file should have more info.

• About the part that says, Sim watched a speech by then-Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong on the social significance of clean public toilets. It feels a bit out of place in the context of his business career, unless it directly affected his decisions and career. You could consider either proving additional context as to its subsequent relevance on his career, or omitting it to streamline the narrative.

• Sim founded BOP Hub, a non-profit organisation targeting bottom-of-pyramid individuals at the poorest global income margins in 2011, developing a $10,000,000 building in Ubi. I'm trying to find a relationship between the building and the rest of the sentence. With the way it's currently structured, I interpret it as BOP Hub being the entity responsible for developing the building. Is that what it means? For clarity's sake, I think it may need rephrasing.

• I've not gone through the citations yet, but if you could add citation(s) to the places that were tagged as needing citation, it would be better.

@Dawkin Verbier, @ZyphorianNexus, what's the status here? It doesn't look like there's been any movement on the article since the initial review. -- asilvering (talk) 00:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Following up on asilvering's query after over a month: reviewer ZyphorianNexus hasn't edited Wikipedia since 10 May, two days after opening this nomination and nearly three months ago, and nominator Dawkin Verbier hasn't edited the article in those three months to address the issues raised in that review. If nothing has happened to change any of this in the next seven days, my suggestion would be to close the nomination as abandoned. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:23, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the lack of response since 28 June is enough to call it - I'll just close it as unsuccessful now rather than wait a week. -- asilvering (talk) 00:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]