Talk:Nazir Razak
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | Nazir Razak was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (August 11, 2026). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_article_reviewing_guide
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:Nazir Razak/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Pangalau (talk · contribs) 02:07, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
Reviewer: Rainsage (talk · contribs) 00:23, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
I'll be reviewing this over the next few days. Rainsage (talk) 00:27, 6 August 2026 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Tick boxes
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear, concise and understandable to an appropriately broad audience, 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:
- A. The prose is clear, concise and understandable to an appropriately broad audience, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- 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:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- 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):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- 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:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Result of first review: hold
- Hi Pangalau I finished my first look through! It was an interesting read. I highlighted some recommendations below, mostly regarding text that was unclear or could be reworded. Additionally, I have some concerns about sourcing. I will hold my review for 7 days to give you time to address my comments, after which we can discuss next steps. Please let me know if you have any questions!
- Lead
- Student organizations & being CIMB's "first fresh graduate recruit" seem undue/trivial for the lead of an article about a 59 year old businessman.
- The coverage about the 1MDB scandal should be clearer; it is difficult to ascertain what his involvement was. In particular, the phrase "Political funding" is unclear.
- What is a "development impact framework"?
- Early life and education
- What is a "cadet team"?
- I don't see in Citation 6 where it says that he was a prefect, head of the cadet team or received a Honors BS.
- Is it possible to mention MASSA and Marshall Society 1x in this paragraph instead of 2x?
- Career
- “its dynamic culture and challenger mentality” sounds like MOS:PUFFERY. I recommend rewording.
- why did colleagues and senior leadership at CIMB advocate for hiring him?
- where in citation 9 does he call the 1997 financial crisis an defining moment in his career?
- "all aspects of merchant banking": it sounds hyperbolic/puffery to use the word "all" here. I would recommend a different word such as "many" or "various"
- where in citation 15 does it say the bank expanded operations in indonesia in 2009 through Bank Niaga?
- citation 15 doesn't explicitly say that the Cambodian branches opened in 2009.
- the 2 sentences about "reviewing aspects of the 1MDB bond transactions" are a little unclear. how and why did he review the transactions? what aspects did he review? what exactly were the challenges and criticism?
- it seems unnecessary to mention Md Nor Yusof here.
- it seems unnecessary to mention the executive committee on strategic matters and oversight because it sounds like routine / non-notable chairman work
- the section about the 1MDB scandal is a bit unclear. i would recommend including more detail about the nature of the news coverage and the scrutiny about him. i recommend citing secondary news coverage instead of relying on the Euromoney interview with Nazir. What is the relevance to Nazir of the $681 million transfer into Najib's account?
- I would add a brief descriptor of who Mahathir Mohamad is (e.g. "former PM")
- the NY Times says that the review was conducted by CIMB with the assistance of Ernst & Young, so I don't think "independent review" is the correct term here.
- Citation 20 doesn't mention regret or Nazir's claim that he did not break the law or misuse his position
- I would mention in the lead and elsewhere that Nazir is credited with transforming CIMB from a small bank to a major one (per citation 23, , etc)
- It seems unnecessary to mention Zaiton Mohd Hassan here.
- I would be more specific about the "operational and governance enhancements"; otherwise it just sounds like puffery/routine work for a chairman.
- Personal life
- The first paragraph seems more suited for the Early Life and Education section
- I recommend removing "prominent" as it seems puffery/unnecessary
- How was Abdul Razak's upbringing "shaped by his father" and what is the relevance to Nazir?
- Sources
- I have concerns about the sourcing in this article. Some primary or non-independent sourcing is okay, but this article relies too much on such sources. It should rely much more secondary, independent sourcing.
- Citations 1,2,4,10,11,12,27,28: Nazir's self-published memoir
- Citation 6 (referenced 7x): Nazir's personal website
- Citation 9 (referenced 4x): an interview with Nazir that is written mostly from his POV
- Citation 16, 22, 33: press releases from his employers
- Citation 21: unreliable source (per WP:IBTIMES 📌)
- Citation 30: Nazir's personal instagram
- Citation 31: Nazir's biodata at Wawasan Open University
- Citation 35-36: Nazir's universites
- Citation 38-39: Malayasian government websites
Rainsage (talk) 07:32, 7 August 2026 (UTC)
- @Rainsage: I have tried my best to incorporate the suggested changes. I had the most difficulty with the references, as there are limited news publications supporting some of the claims, including those concerning government appointments. In addition, there are relatively few biographical sources available on Nazir. Pangalau (talk) 12:57, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
- Ok. I still find the 1MDB content throughout the article to be unclear. More importantly, I don't think an article with so many primary/non-independent sources qualifies as a good article. Unfortunately, I am going to fail the article on the basis that it does not meet criteria 1 and 2. If you disagree with my assessment, please re-submit for another reviewer. Thank you for all your work on it! Rainsage (talk) 02:05, 11 August 2026 (UTC)