Talk:Land reform in interwar Yugoslavia

Land reform in interwar Yugoslavia has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 26, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Bosnia and Herzegovina Low‑importance

	Bosnia and Herzegovina portal Land reform in interwar Yugoslavia is part of the WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Bosnia and Herzegovina on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Bosnia and HerzegovinaWikipedia:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaTemplate:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaBosnia and Herzegovina
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Croatia Low‑importance

	Croatia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Croatia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Croatia 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.CroatiaWikipedia:WikiProject CroatiaTemplate:WikiProject CroatiaCroatia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Montenegro Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montenegro, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Montenegro 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.MontenegroWikipedia:WikiProject MontenegroTemplate:WikiProject MontenegroMontenegro
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

North Macedonia Low‑importance

	North Macedonia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North Macedonia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North Macedonia 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.North MacedoniaWikipedia:WikiProject North MacedoniaTemplate:WikiProject North MacedoniaNorth Macedonia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Serbia Low‑importance

	Serbia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia 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.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Slovenia Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Slovenia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Slovenia 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.SloveniaWikipedia:WikiProject SloveniaTemplate:WikiProject SloveniaSlovenia

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Slovenia to-do list:

Here are some tasks you can do (watch):

Requests: , Protestant Reformation in the Slovene Lands (sl), Metlika black (sl)
Wikify: Russia–Slovenia relations
Unreferenced: Inner Carniola, Litostroj, Pavel Golia, Predjama Castle
Cleanup: Edvard Ravnikar, Škofja Loka, Inex-Adria Aviopromet Flight 1308
Expand: Education in Slovenia
Stubs: Ajdovi žganci, Čop Street, Radenska
NPOV: Gregorij Rožman, Siddharta (band)
Portal maintenance: Update News, Did you know, announcements, and suggest Selected article and picture
Help assess the quality of 36 unassessed articles
Take/Add requested photographs

Yugoslavia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Yugoslavia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Yugoslavia 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.YugoslaviaWikipedia:WikiProject YugoslaviaTemplate:WikiProject YugoslaviaYugoslavia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Dhtwiki, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on December 16–21, 2024.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

References and citations

Latest comment: 1 month ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Reference no. 76: "Thomson 1993, p. 842" doesn't point to any citation. Governor Sheng (talk) 23:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

That's a typo. It's Thompson. Good catch.--Tomobe03 (talk) 23:38, 4 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

Latest comment: 22 days ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Passed. E_F⁵ 19:40, 26 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Land reform in interwar Yugoslavia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 10:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: EF5 (talk · contribs) 17:15, 24 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'll be reviewing this shortly. :) E_F⁵ 17:15, 24 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
No issues prose-wise, it's written pretty good and has an appropriate amount of sections. I didn't see any weasel words.
It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
The entire article is cited appropriately, and all references are to books. The references are also formatted properly, with page numbers and such. I saw no significant plagiarism.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Talks about the background of the process, implementation, etc., so no issues here.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
As above, no weasel words or undue claims that I could find.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
There is no vandalism in the page's edit history so far, so good here.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Article has seven images, all of which are tagged properly and have appropriate captions.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Good job! Usually I have comments, but I really couldn't find anything that needed improvement. :) E_F⁵ 19:40, 26 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above 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 review query

Latest comment: 22 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

@EF5 Just to check, did you do a spot-check of the sources? Your review didn't explicitly say if you did or not, so I'm just making sure to be safe! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 20:03, 26 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

I don't have access to a single source used, so I had to AGF. E_F⁵ 20:09, 26 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Add topic