Talk:Dániel Karsai

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

Nominator: Kovcszaln6 (talk · contribs) 08:51, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: AdobongPogi (talk · contribs) 02:45, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Kovcszaln6:, thank you for addressing the comments from my previous review. The Earwig result is fine, and I have no further concerns with the "Personal life" section.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

• Well written
  • the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct;
    • The prose is generally clear and easy to follow. I recommend a final copyedit of a few sentences that closely follow the wording of their sources or contain several details in succession.

• • • For example, this sentence:

• "Despite losing all his legal cases, he gained significant public support, and he considered the results of his fight a great success." could be revised to make the attribution clearer: "Although Karsai lost his legal cases, he received public support and considered the outcome of his campaign a success."

• this sentence: "Karsai co-wrote the play Egy tökéletes nap (lit. 'One Perfect Day'), telling his story." could be revised for clearer wording: "Karsai co-wrote the play Egy tökéletes nap (lit. 'One Perfect Day'), which was based on his story."

• • • Similarly, some sentences can be reworded to make them read more naturally. For example:

• • it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
    • The lead gives a useful summary of Karsai's career, illness, euthanasia campaign, legal proceedings, and legacy. I do not see any major layout or lead-section problems.

• Verifiable with no original research
  • it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline
    • The references are presented using standard citation templates and appear to follow the usual formatting.

• • 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).
    • The article is generally well sourced. I recommend translating the titles of non-English sources into English where appropriate, while retaining the original-language title through the |trans-title= parameter. This would make the references easier for English-language readers to understand.

• • it contains no original research
    • I have not identified any obvious original research. After the remaining comments are addressed, I will proceed with a spot-check of the cited sources.

• • it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism
    • The WP:EARWIG result is fine 13.8%, and I do not see any obvious copyright concerns requiring further rewriting on that basis.

• Broad in its coverage
  • it addresses the main aspects of the topic
    • The article covers the major aspects of Karsai's life, including his legal career, ALS diagnosis, euthanasia activism, legal proceedings, personal life, death, legacy, awards, and works.

• • it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail
    • The article generally remains focused on Karsai. The amount of detail about his euthanasia campaign is appropriate because it was a major part of his public life.

• Neutral
  • it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each
    • The article appears neutral. It presents Karsai's position on euthanasia alongside the positions of the Hungarian government and other political and religious figures.

• Stable
  • it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute
    • I have not observed any ongoing edit wars or content disputes affecting the article.

• Illustrated
  • The article includes images relevant to Karsai's life and career, including an image related to his work at the European Court of Human Rights. The images appear appropriately placed.

Additional comments:

• Red links: There are several red links throughout the article. Red links are not necessarily a problem for GA status, particularly when the subject could reasonably have its own article. I am fine with retaining red links where they are useful. Where an article already exists in another language, use {{Interlanguage link}} to provide readers with access to the relevant article. The remaining red links should simply be reviewed individually to make sure they are useful and relevant.

• See also: The "See also" section should provide additional navigation to closely related topics that are useful to readers but are not already adequately linked in the article. It is not required for GA status. Some of the current entries, such as Assisted suicide, Legality of euthanasia, Right to die, and Voluntary euthanasia, are closely related to subjects already discussed in the article. I recommend checking whether each link provides additional navigational value. If a link is already sufficiently covered by a link in the article, it may not be necessary to repeat it in "See also". If the links provide useful additional navigation, they can be retained.

• Source titles: Please translate the titles of Hungarian- and German-language sources into English where appropriate, while retaining the original title with the |trans-title= parameter and keeping the appropriate |language= parameter. This will make the reference list easier for English-speaking readers to understand.

• Source spot-check: All online sources should be archived to ensure that the citations remain accessible if the original webpages are changed or removed. Please ensure that the archived versions support the same claims as the current sources. After the above points are addressed, I will proceed with a spot-check of the cited sources to verify that the sources support the corresponding claims and that there are no significant citation issues.

Hi @Kovcszaln6:, thank you again for your work on this article. After these are addressed, I will proceed with the source spot-check. AdobongPogi ^{masarap 🍛} 03:24, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

@AdobongPogi: Thank you for your feedback, I appreciate your review. I've copyedited the sentences you mentioned and a few others, but please let me know if there are still parts of the article that need editing. I believe translating source titles is not a requirement for GA, but nonetheless, I included those. I believe the red links are appropriate; most of them already use the {{ill}} template, as they have Hungarian wiki pages. Similarly, I think the "See also" section has no problems. Again, archiving sources is not a GA requirement, but I've also included that per your request. Kovcszaln6 (talk) 08:08, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

@AdobongPogi: Any updates on this? Kovcszaln6 (talk) 07:19, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Hey @Kovcszaln6 I'm sorry for the delay, as I have a lot of work outside Wikipedia. Anyway, I checked your revision history, and the edits look good. I'm sending it to you now for a source spot check. AdobongPogi^{masarap 🍛} 02:31, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

@Kovcszaln6 I ping you here since I can't reply to your feedback in the spot check. Actually, my point there was about identifying where the sources support the paragraph, since some of the citations were grouped together and I couldn't tell which source supported which statements. You may check my edits; I split some of the sources to make it clearer. But I passed it now since there are no minor issues there. AdobongPogi^{masarap 🍛} 10:26, 28 August 2026 (UTC)