# Talk:Petar Kočić

This review is transcluded from Talk:Petar Kočić/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Bryanrutherford0 (talk · contribs) 16:34, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

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): 
The prose standard is good. The MoS is followed for all the required sections excepting the lead; I've trimmed a lot of excessive detail out of the lead, but now it needs a better summary of Kočić's work and importance as a writer (it currently presents him almost exclusively as an activist and politician).
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 
I'll have to AGF on the offline books and papers, as well as the non-English sources, but there's enough accessible online to confirm the overall outline of the article, as well as many of the details. No signs of plagiarism that I can see, though I can't check for close paraphrasing from the offline sources.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
The article seems to cover most of the biography's major points, though it should probably mention his marriage (currently he just suddenly has a wife sometime around his stay in Vienna?). One significant problem is that, while the article describes Kočić as a playwright and claims that he was "one of the most important South Slavic playwrights of the 20th century," it only mentions him writing one one-act play. This needs to be clarified.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
The images all appear to have appropriate licenses.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
Most of the comments from the previous review still stand; I've made a few updates. There are a few issues of coverage and clarity that need to resolved. If those are addressed, it will be able to meet the standard. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 16:34, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Bryanrutherford0. Thanks for picking up this article once again. From what I gather, your primary concern is the lack of coverage about the plays the author wrote. I'll try and find more detailed sources in the next few days. Thanks. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 15:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
Coverage of his work as a playwright and at least some mention of his marriage in the body, and then more balanced coverage in the lead that presents him as a writer as well as an activist and politician. Those are the major lacks that I see. Thanks for taking this up! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 17:06, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
I think I've addressed  all the points you brought up, Bryanrutherford0. What are your thoughts? Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:22, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
This is great progress! I guess my one remaining concern is that the article still calls him "one of the most important South Slavic playwrights of the 20th century"; can that really be true if he apparently only wrote one one-act play? I can't access the entire page that the claim is cited to, but what I can see says that "Bosnian dramaturgy has not produced a single classic," presumably including "The Badger on Trial". Is there evidence of his importance specifically as a playwright that I'm not seeing? If not, then these claims (and the infobox) should be revised, probably to call him an important "writer" rather than an important "playwright". -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 17:04, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
You're right, Bryanrutherford0. I just checked Rubin and he describes him as one of the most important Bosnian playwrights, not South Slavic as a whole. Good catch! As for The Badger on Trial, a quick search of Google Books shows that several different authors have characterized it as one of his "best" and "most enduring plays", so it probably merits inclusion in the opening paragraph. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:18, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Great, this looks ready to go. Thanks for your work! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 17:40, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

@Santasa99: Hey, MOS:ETHNICITY says "Ethnicity ... should generally not be in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability", but this figure is notable as an influential Serb nationalist, so it looks to me like his ethnicity does belong here. Do you still think it should go? -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 21:12, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for asking, I would go with "no" on your first statement, because he is primarily notable as a writer from Bosnia and Herzegovina ("LEDE"). He was born into Bosnian Serb family (Subsection, "Early life"), and his political activism is secondary to his writing. So, yeah, I do believe it should be avoided in the Lede.--౪ Santa ౪99° 21:52, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
His writing and political career are equally important. Kočić was a prominent Serb nationalist in Bosnia, and thus his ethnicity is notable to be included in the first paragraph. And as far as I know, there isn't a dispute regarding his ethnicity. My recommendation would be to either keep the ethnicity and nationality or to remove both entirely, but I find that both are equally important, so it is a keep from me. I've also found that academic sources tend to describe him more as "Bosnian Serb" or just "Serbian", but in my opinion, Bosnian Serb is more descriptive and correct. Cheers, --Vacant0 (talk) 13:28, 17 December 2021 (UTC)