In the modern world, Talk:Louis Zhang Jiashu/GA1 has become a topic of great relevance and interest to a wide spectrum of society. Whether for its impact on health, the economy, the environment or culture, Talk:Louis Zhang Jiashu/GA1 has captured the attention of experts and citizens alike. As we move into the 21st century, the importance of understanding and addressing Talk:Louis Zhang Jiashu/GA1 becomes increasingly pressing. This article seeks to explore the various facets of Talk:Louis Zhang Jiashu/GA1, analyzing its causes, consequences and possible solutions. Through a multidisciplinary approach, it aims to shed light on an issue that not only impacts our lives on an individual level, but also has large-scale repercussions on society as a whole.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: TheLonelyPather (talk · contribs) 08:52, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Reviewer: Sawyer-mcdonell (talk · contribs) 07:05, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
i aim to get through this in the next week or so ... sawyer * he/they * talk 07:06, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
The Atlantic article (Minter 2007) listed in the magazines section of the bibliography is unused - it has a harverror. There are also quite a lot of optimistic redlinks, which I'm absolutely not opposed to, but many of them are not introduced in the prose (such as Angelo Lazzarotto) and that would be good to clarify. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 18:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Is there anything out there about his legacy? He died over 35 years ago; some hindsight about his impact on the Chinese Catholic Church would really round out the article for criteria 3a. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 19:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Sourcing - all the sources seem reliable & perfectly fine; glad to see a lot of academic sourcing here. I can't read the Chinese sources, but I spot-checked the citations to the main English-language sources (Mariani 2011 & 2016, Lazzarotto 2017) and everything looks good to me. I think the legacy aspect has been addressed, and I don't have any further concerns regarding the GA criteria. Excellent work! ... sawyer * he/they * talk 23:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|