Jump to content

Wikipedia:Africa-related regional notice board/Peer review/2007

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archived 2007 peer reviews.

Amenhotep I

[edit]

I've been working on this article off and on for about six months, and since it just passed GA, I believe it time to expose it to greater scrutiny. Its major failing is that I alone have written most of the text, and accordingly it may read perfectly fine to me, since I have experience in the field, but it may not make a lot of sense to a layperson, and that is the kind of problem I want to flush out to fix. In general, confusing areas, styalistically awkward places, and big blank spots where you think somthing hasn't been covered enough would be good things to point out. Thanatosimii 05:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toyota War

[edit]

I originally thought of creating this article just to alleviate the length of Chadian-Libyan conflict; but then I started working at it, trying to make it a good article. This has made me think of the possibility of attempting to make it the first GA in Chad-related topics. All criticisms will be immensely appreciated; in particular, I'm concerned with the prose, as its not my first language, and if there are any repetitions in the exposition. Also, I'm not certain about the lead.--Aldux 21:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kirill Lokshin

[edit]

Not bad at all. Some things that need work, though:

  • {{Infobox Military Conflict}} needs to be added.
  • Are there any images available here? At a minimum, some maps would be very useful.
  • The lead should, indeed, be longer; two or three paragraphs would probably suffice to provide a stand-alone summary of the article.
  • The prose isn't bad, per se, but some copyediting by native speakers would probably be helpful.

Kirill Lokshin 22:26, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I brought the images issue up at Talk:Chadian-Libyan conflict. Commons has nothing of use save the garishly colored Aozou Strip image which I added to that article six days ago. Picaroon 22:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll make a lead that presents a summary of the main events.--Aldux 23:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've written down an expanded lead, and given some context.--Aldux 00:04, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picaroon

[edit]
  • I was noticing the same things as Kirill, and have begun acting upon them. Seeing as there is a lack of other images, I've added the Chadian and Libyan flags.
  • There are also some things which are probably just differences in sentence structure between Italian and English, mainly the placement of phrases - if you check my recent changes, you'll see I've rearranged some sentences.
  • Seeing as I was the one who suggested you split it off in the first place, I guess I'm to blame for this: there are places where not enough context is provided, or too much familiarity is assumed. I've wikilinked several things already and mentioned who Gaddafi was to try to rectify this. Picaroon 22:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Picaroon. I'm not very coonvinced about the flags; there not specific enough, a map, even general, would be probably better. And yes, I keep forgetting that Chad - ahem (euphemism coming) - is not one of the best known countries in the world. I'll try to add some context.--Aldux 23:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Tyers

[edit]
I've written a pitiful little stub on Djamous, but Google doesn't turn up enough for this Jamahiriya Guard. Picaroon 23:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, perhaps it has another name? - Francis Tyers · 23:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In this edit, I changed its spelling from "Jamahiriyyah Guard" because that's a less widely used variant of Jamahiriya (Arabic for "mass-state," IIRC). I guess we should leave it to Aldux, seeing as he has access to the book which mentioned it. Picaroon 23:48, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Jamahiriya Guard is mentioned by Metz and Pollack as a sort of pretorian guard, recruited only amongst Gaddafi's tribal clan. I'll try to work on it, maybe it's called often in the west "Repubblican Guard" or "Presidential Guard" (it may have been disbanded; my info regards the 1980s).--Aldux 23:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As for the infobox, I can add some other info not contained yet in the article, and will expand Djamous. As for the Libyan or Chadian name of the conflict, I strongly doubt an estabilished name, as Libya has just removed any memory of this war, while Chad is too small to have developed a specific pov on the question.--Aldux 23:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've written a small stub on the Jamahiriyyah Guard. It seems that Fran was correct in suspectng an alternative name was more commonly used, and the name tends to be Revolutionary Guard.--Aldux 18:56, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, looks like a good stub. - Francis Tyers · 22:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pictures / Photographs

Here are some links to photographs — any chance of having a fair use rationale for any of them? - Francis Tyers · 23:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should be easy to get at least a couple, using {{historicalphoto}}; they're pretty much all non-reproducible. Kirill Lokshin 23:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aye. I guess its just down to which ones to pick. I'll look around for more and post them here then we can make a choice of the most appropriate. You're right they're non-reproducible, it would be great to find some PD-US-gov, but I think it highly unlikely :( - Francis Tyers · 23:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd focus on the photographs that actually show combat action; they're likely to be a bit more meaningful that the generic French-plane-flying ones. Kirill Lokshin 23:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely. Preferably one from each side. - Francis Tyers · 23:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Something like this one would be good — no watermark and it shows the namesake of the war. - Francis Tyers · 23:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've never been any good with images - but if some can be used, maybe even the planes may be helpful for the connected Opération Epervier and Opération coup de poing. If some image could be found also for the Chadian-Libyan conflict article, it would be great, as it too will probably be passed through a peer review.--Aldux 23:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(de-indent)

Ok, I added one to the infobox. As fair as fair use (*cough* *spit*) goes, I think we have a fair claim to this one. It would be nice to remove the black border, but I'm not sure if that counts as a derivative work. If anyone wants to find a photo for the Libyan side that would be good. - Francis Tyers · 09:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BanyanTree

[edit]

Specific points

  • What is the CDR? Also, please add that article to the disambiguation page CDR.
  • "France answered with a second airstrike" - what was the first airstrike? needs context
  • "affected the perception of Libya as a significant regional military power" - perception of who? international or domestic observers?

General points

  • There is a definite need for more background over why this war is happening and what happened in the previous phases. One tightly written paragraph may be enough.
  • I've copyedited a bit and added the garish map mentioned by Picaroon above. There are a couple of editors who have created battle maps in the past whom may be willing to create custom maps if you approach them and point out sources.
  • Were there any economic or humanitarian effects, e.g. refugees and IDPs?

Otherwise, I think it is quite good. I dislike massive articles greatly and this gives a reasonable amount of detail (though I would like more context and operational-level detail) in a reasonable length. - BanyanTree 01:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found what the CDR is via a google search for cdr chad libya - it's something called the Democratic Revolutionary Council. I'll add that to the dab page. Picaroon 21:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to thank everybody for the fantastic work done; I would never have expected the reviews to arrive so fast, and with so many edits to the article thanks! :-) It's a bit late here, so I'll only briefly awnser.
Regarding the specific points raised by BT,
  • Picaroon is correct regarding the CDR; I'll create an article on the miltia commanded by Ahmat Acyl.
  • Oops, the first one is the 1986 Opération coup de poing. As this article was originally just a section of a bigger article, what before was obvious is not anymore so.
  • "affected the perception of Libya as a significant regional military power" - shall change to "affected the international perception of Libya as a significant regional military power"
As for the general points
  • You're write, I'll try a paragraph lifted from the material in Chadian-Libyan conflict
  • As for the maps, this French website has some that would be very interesting If I could obtain them [[1]]. On wikipedia there's this meeting between Habré and Miterrand during the Toyota War [2], and maybe this map of Chad could be useful [3], as many of the towns mentioned on the article are there (Aouzou, Faya-Largeau, Fada, the capital, the Libyan base of Maaten as-Sara)
  • Regarding humanitarian effects, I know very little, mainly through a few hints given by Nolutshungu. Remember that the war to retake northern Chad took only 3 months, and that northern Chad is all desert (i.e., very few inhabitants).
  • What do you mean by "more operational-level detail"?--Aldux 23:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By operational level detail, I think he's referring to details of specific skirmishes/battles, ie formations, human losses, etc... I suspect that there won't be much information on these, because it seems unlikely to have written down in detail. Picaroon 23:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I do have some of this sort of info, especially from Pollack, but I didn't want to go too much in detail because I was projecting to write Battle of Bir Kora, Battle of Ouadi Doum, Battle of Aouzou, Battle of Maaten as-Sarra and reference/expand Battle of Fada.--Aldux 23:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A brief summary of the course of the war, with links to the battle would be great. - BanyanTree 00:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When you say "a brief summary of the war", you mean a summary of the events already present in the article in the lead? As for the links to the battles, sure.--Aldux 22:40, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Automated

[edit]

Buckshot06

[edit]

No mention, even a short one, of the UN Aouzou Strip Observer Group - should be at least mentioned briefly. Buckshot06 09:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opération Manta

[edit]

Always as part of my work on the Chadian-Libyan conflict, I've written down an article on this French military intervention in Chad, hoping to make it a GA article, like I've done with Toyota War. The most obvious defect is the lack of images, but, alas, there isn't much I can do to solve this now. Another problem may be the grammar, not being a native speaker. As for the lead, I hope it's not too long; also should I add inline citations to the lead? I haven't till now because it just presented and summarized content well referenced in the following sections.--Aldux 21:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bcasterline

[edit]

A few comments:

  • "Background" leaves some context out. What do you mean "the fall of the Chadian capital"? What happened?
  • The first paragraph of "Stalemate" doesn't make any sense.
  • Some of the information in "French withdrawal" might belong in "Aftermath" instead.

The article looks pretty comprehensive. Could use some more copyediting for grammar/wording though. -- bcasterline • talk 22:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded a bit the background, and rewritten the "Stalemate" paragraph. As for the grammar/wording, you and Picaroon have hopefully bettered it; I'm unfortunately unable to do much better.--Aldux 18:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kirill Lokshin

[edit]

Quite nice, overall. A few points to consider, though:

  • The "Background" section is pretty stubby; it may be worthwhile to consider some sort of rearrangement of the first sections.
  • Marking up the map a bit to show troop movements, etc., would probably be helpful.

The lead doesn't need to be directly cited if it's just a summary of the article.

Beyond that, as bcasterline said, stylistic copyediting would be appropriate, at this point. Kirill Lokshin 03:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfotunately, I have simply no idea how to mark an image. Picaroon and Bcasterline have worked on the grammar and wording. I've added something to the background, but I'll try to add more. As for the "rearrangement of the first sections", could you give me some hint? In what sense do you feel the present disposition should be rearranged? Thanks, --Aldux 18:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PocklingtonDan

[edit]
  • "by a joint force Libyan soldiers " -> "by a joint force of Libyan soldiers "
  • "on July 31 brought to the assembling in Chad " -> "on July 31 led to the assembling in Chad "
  • "drew "a line in the sand." " - if this is a quote it needs a cite, if it isn't, I would remove the quote marks
  • "with the Libyans and the GUNT controlling the north and Habré central and southern Chad" - this doesn't read write - they controlled the north and the south? What did the French control then?
  • "French President Mitterrand" - any reason he doesn't get a first name?
  • "a mutual withdrawal of their countries troops " -> "a mutual withdrawal of their countries' troops "
  • Since this is an English-language encyclopedia, should this whole article not be byu the English name Operation Stingray?? This seems to be the practice taken in all other battle and war articles I have seen.
  • "recognizing Goukouni as the legitimate ruler of Chad, and provided arming and training for his forces" - mix of tenses
  • "gave way in June 1983 to a massive joint GUNT-Libyan attack against Faya-Largeau" - don't think you mean gave way, I think rather agreed or acceeded to demands for. I think you also need to state who was calling for this.
  • "annoverating 3,000 men" - I don't understand. comprising of? consisting of? numbering?
  • "Thus assisted by weapons from France, US and Zaire" This contradicts the earlier statement that France and US contributed arms, and Zaire men.
  • "and taking advantage of the GUNT's Habré took personal command " - thisnk there is a word nmissing after GUNT's - doesn't make any sense
  • "bringing to his shattering defeat " -> "bringing him to a shattering defeat"
  • "Even if France threatened on August 25 that it would not tolerate Gaddafi's occupation of Faya-Largeau[11], even if at the end the French proved themself unwilling to openly confront Libya and retake northern Chad for Habré, thus giving the impression to concede Gaddafi the overlordship over the Borkou-Ennedi-Tibesti Prefecture" - these "even ifs" make no sense
  • "not only in the short period" -> "not only in the short term"
  • "due to Libya's incapacity to balance " -> "due to Libya's inability to balance "
  • "by stiking the GUNT at Faya-Largeau" -> striking
  • "risking to cause an escalation of the conflict." -> "risking an escalation of the conflict."
  • "two Juaguar fighter-bombers to invest the attackers " - invest means to siege, this is not a word normally applied to aircraft. perhaps harrass?
  • "rise the Red Line from the 15th to the 16th parallel" rise-> extend/retract
  • mutaual -> mutual
  • "were getting tired up with an intervention " -> "were becoming bogged down in an intervention "
  • Other than these grammatical problems I think the article is good - it gives a good overview of a conflict I knew nothing about. - PocklingtonDan (talk) 13:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your fantastic and scrupolous work controlling my gramar, Dan! You've really done a precious help thanks. I've integrated your corrections now. Grazie again!--Aldux 23:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I will do another run through it now and see if I can see anything else - PocklingtonDan (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article is in great shape but still looks like it needs the attentions of an English-speaking copyeditor I think, just to polish the language a little. I don't have time to devote to this I'm afraid, but best of luck - PocklingtonDan (talk) 21:01, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Catalan

[edit]

Good article - I certainly learned something from it. A few points, however:

  • POV:
    • The United States announced that 25 million US dollars in critically needed equipment would be provided. - It's not really inferring a point of view, but it might be a point of contention to nit-pickers at some later point. I would take out the word critically, as the point still gets across without it.
  • Images: Have you tried contacting websites on the topic for the use of their images? You can be surprised how nice they can be - Morozov sure was for the Ch'onma-ho article.
  • Grammar: Quite a few problems here - the article will need a thorough copyedit. If I have time I may go through it at a later time.

JonCatalan 00:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed "critically needed". As for the websites, I'd first have to try webite on the topics, which is quite hard - Chad isn't the best known country in the world, to use an euphemism, and it's no surprise I had to use alost exclusively books and not the web for writing this article. As for the grammar, Bcasterline, Dan and Picaroon were of considerable help, but I would IMMENSELY appreciate any help with copyediting you would give :-)))))--Aldux 23:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cameroon

[edit]

This article's been rewritten over the past two or three months. I'd like to submit it to WP:FAC, but this is by far the most ambitious article rewrite I've ever attempted, so I want to solicit opinion first. Any suggestions, comments, or criticisms are welcome. For example, the citation density was very high just a short while ago, when I had cited a source for every single statement in the article. Did I cut too much? Not enough? What needs to happen to make this an exemplary country article? Thanks, — Brian (talk) 10:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bcasterline

[edit]

I don't know much about the subject or the standard for country articles, but, caveats aside, this looks like a great overview. Well-written and organized; not much I can criticize. Couple comments though:

  • The sentence "Cameroon came to international attention on 21 August 1986 when Lake Nyos belched toxic fumes and killed between 1,700 and 2,000 people." comes out of no where since the rest of the history section focuses on politics. It's a noteworthy event, but in the scope of the article it may not be important -- unless there's more to say about consequences, etc.
  • Perhaps add more on tribal vs. national affiliation? The conflict was mentioned a couple times but only in passing.

Good luck. -- bcasterline • talk 22:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. Regarding your first point, it's a toughie. Basically, the two facts most everyone knows about Cameroon are: a) They have a good football team; and b) They had a natural disaster in the 1980s where a lake killed a bunch of people. I wanted to make sure I covered both points. I'll see if maybe I can't work Nyos in somewhere else, such as the Geography section. Regarding your second point, I'll see if I can't dig up some more information about tribalism in the country. Thanks again! — Brian (talk) 22:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nichalp

[edit]
  • Subsections needs to go
  • Sections need to be summarised
  • Further review once this is done.

=Nichalp «Talk»= 19:02, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments, but I'm not sure I understand. What's wrong with subsections? And the prose size is currently within standards, so I'm not sure why further summarization is needed. However, I do acknowledge that "History" may be a bit long. I'll see if I can't reduce it some. — Brian (talk) 00:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've edited down the "History" section to 4 KB of text-only prose, which is equivalent to the same section of the Featured Article on India. — Brian (talk) 05:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Much better, now other sections need to be pruned down. Culture, Demographics and Economy can get rid of unessential data, while politics and government can be split into a one or two sections.
  2. Remove all set pixel values for images. Align them to the right for now
  3. Administrative divisions could do with the regions as a list. Also could you request that the map be converted to SVG format?

=Nichalp «Talk»= 19:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I disagree that anything else needs to be really pruned. Readable prose is now almost perfect: 32 KB (so I could conceivably trim 2 KB of stuff, granted). I think you may be onto something about splitting Politics and Government, so I'll look into it. I rather like the image distribution at the moment; what would be the point of removing the pixel values and right aligning the lot of them? As for the list of provinces, lists get the ax regularly on FAC, in my experience. But the SVG map would be a good idea; I'll ping the folks at the graphics lab. Thanks again for the comments! — Brian (talk) 01:46, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It should be pruned further, 6-7 paragraphs make the section too long, and sections for a geographic location article are all summaries. Ideally, it should be three mid paragraphs (~200-250 words) with the content being the summary of the main article (ie the content of the article which appears in the lead of Geography of Cameroon, Economy of Cameroon etc.). About the list for administrative divisions, that's one case where nobody objects since putting it in prose is more difficult to read. =Nichalp «Talk»= 04:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If I can add my opinion, I tend to agree with Brian here. I full agree regarding the list of provinces: few things are as ugly in this sort of articles. While I disagree with the radicality of Nichalp's proposals regarding pruning, I do feel that a minor pruning with the sections "economy" and "culture" could be useful. After that, pass it to FAC, where other editors will be ready to offer further suggestions. That said, I'm no expert in FA.--Aldux 12:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've trimmed some more fat and killed another 1KB of text. Trimming further from the "Politics and government" or "Economy" sections is problematic, since these are actually conglomerations of things that other country articles devote several sections to. For example, "Politics and government" covers the politics of Cameroon, foreign relations of Cameroon, education in Cameroon, and healthcare in Cameroon. Likewise, "Economy" (now renamed "Economy and infrastructure") includes the economy of Cameroon, tourism in Cameroon, transport in Cameroon, and communications in Cameroon. In other words, they cover a lot of ground and shouldn't need to be cut further. — Brian (talk) 05:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aldux

[edit]

Damn, this article is simply too good, I really would love to have a similar one for Chad :-) It's certaincainly ready to stand for WP:FAC. Also the sources and the images are very good. Only, I'll observe:

  • I also feel that the subsections should go; really one of the problems is that the history of the economy sections of this article are much better, and almost greater of the respective history of Cameroon and economy of Cameroon, which in theory should give a more detailed treatment of these topics. I advise to reduce especially the history section, moving considerable chunks of material to History of Cameroon.
  • The "external links" section is really meagre. Couldn't you add some other valuable external links to to this sections.--Aldux 00:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Yes, I primarily write articles on Cameroon's history, so it's tough for me to decide what to cut from the "History" section. I do note that it is the longest section in the article and could be shortened. However, I don't think that the abysmal state of history of Cameroon and economy of Cameroon should be held against this article; my goal is to get this one up to FA first and then turn my attentions to the sub articles. But I'll look at maybe reducing the "History" section a bit more and moving stuff to history of Cameroon. :(
As for the external links, Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries suggests linking only to official websites, and the Cameroonian government just doesn't have much web presence. There was a huge link farm before I began my revisions, but it was mostly spam. I'll take another look at it to make sure I didn't miss anything, though. — Brian (talk) 00:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A thing I've noted only now: there are almost no categories. Shouldn't you add :Category:African Union member states, :Category:Organization of the Islamic Conference, :Category:La Francophonie. Among the navigational templates, you should remove {{Countries of West Africa}}; if you give a look at West Africa, Cameroon is not considered part of that subregion by the UN.--Aldux 18:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for checking these things. All of those subcategories are appended to Category:Cameroon. (It's my understanding that if a subject has an eponymous category, further categorization should be done at the category level rather than the article level). As for the region, the UN has it's categorization scheme, and many other sources differ. Cameroon is regularly categorized as both West and Central African, so I'm not sure that the UN should be the only source deferred to on this. — Brian (talk) 22:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bayajidda

[edit]

Bayajidda (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) I worked on this article on and off for about two months, I've exhausted sources turned up by Google, and I dare say my local library doesn't have very good coverage of Africa - if Bayajidda is mentioned in any books there, I can guarantee it is for no more than two sentences. So, with regards to length, there isn't really anything I can expand, although anyone who can is encouraged to do so. I'm requesting a peer review so as to identify anything besides length that could get in the way of it becoming a good article. Picaroon 21:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peripitus

[edit]

A few comments on what is an interesting read...

  • The lead of the article needs to summarise the entire article and so usually does not have references as they are in the body of the article
  • Would be good to have a section discussing what the sources have said about Bayajidda compared to other hausa mythological characters.
  • Trip across Africa section is just a single paragraph - should be either expanded or merged with a later section.
  • the first sentence of the Analysis of the story's meaning has an issue. It both mentions Malcolm J. Lamb and has a WP:CITE reference to the work. You need to pick one or the other way or referencing this opinion and the counter in the next paragraph.
  • didn't in the lead (and the Arrival in Daura and slaying of the serpent section) needs to be did not

- Peripitus (Talk) 11:49, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Alright, I've added a bit about the story itself to the lead and moved all the references to the body of the article.
  • I'm not sure what to say about this proposed section, save that I've never really heard much about non-Islamic Hausa mythology besides Bayajidda. A lot of the Hausa people converted to Islam between 1100 and 14000, and much of the rest were forced to during the Fulani Jihad of the early 1800s. I've seen nothing comparing and contrasting the Bayajidda Legend with Islam, so to do so would be original research. In conclusion, all I can safely say is that Hausa society is nearly completely Islamic nowadays, and that the few remaining non-Muslim Hausa (there's a derogatory term for them, which I can't recall at the moment) aren't covered much. I'll do some more Googling, but don't get your hopes up.
  • Merged that section and the below one.
  • I've removed the mention of Lamb. However, per Wikipedia:Attribution#Using questionable or self-published sources, it is appropriate to name Lange in the text and cite his work at the same times because he is a respected professor on Africa topics, thereby making his self-published overview of the Conference of the Africa Studies Organization in Germany a relibale source.
  • Contractions expanded. Are there any other barriers you see to this being a good article? Picaroon 21:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aldux

[edit]

Hi Picaroon! I'll just say what immediately appears before the eye. The quality of the article is, obviously, very high, and I well know the effort you've given to this specific article.

  • The lead is too short, in my view. In WP:LEAD, it proposes for medium size articles leads 2-3 paragraphs-long, that summarize the content of the article.
  • The first section, I agree with Periptus, is really too short. As the WP:SS says about sections, "each about several good-sized paragraphs long".
  • You should try to remove the "see also" section by simply embedding the two links in the main text, if possible.
  • I'd propose to rename "Further reading and external links" simply "external links", by removing the book. I generally feel it's not a good idea to insert a further reading, as it's hard for for it's extemely selectivity not to be problematic.
  • If you want to find new sources for your article their may be a possibility on the web you have not yet explored. Have you ever tried with http://books.google.com? If you haven't, if you register (it's free) you will have access to a lot of books; some only offer "Snippet view" (just a few lines of text, too little to be really of any help) but other offer "limited preview", that is, full pages. I've given just a very rapid look, but I've noted the "Cambridge History of Africa", pp. 308-310, and (under Abuyazidu) "Almanac of African Peoples and Nations" pp. 351-352.--Aldux 00:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've expanded the lead to two sentences. Seeing as the main attraction of the article is, in fact, the story, I'm trying to walk a fine line between not going into enough detail and giving out too much.
  • I've merged the first two paragraphs into one.
  • Bayajidda is more of a cultural figure than a historical hero; by this, I mean, he engaged in no wars and founded no countries. Instead, his tale, combined with later Islamic influences, set the foundations for modern Hausa culture. Because of this, I don't think there's a good place for a link to History of Nigeria. The Kano Chronicle link, meanwhile, is just there for anyone who wants more information on Hausa history; there isn't a good place to link to it, either, because it has very little to do with Bayajidda.
  • Yeah, I had qualms about the naming of that section from the beginning, so I've removed the book and changed it to external links. Could you go into more depth about what you mean by extreme selectivity?
  • I'll go see what Google books has to offer. Thanks for the link! Picaroon 00:45, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I just meant with extreme selectivity that mentioning one, or two, or three books is always a small fragment of relevant literature on the topic; for this one should generally avoid, IMO, "further reading" sections, as they are inherently random in character.--Aldux 00:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've done some searching about, and have found several tidbits of information that could be helpful; the suggestion here about him causing a switch from matriarchal to patriarchal society is good. But how do I cite this and other "snippets" I find via books.google? Do I cut&paste the Google url? Do I cite the book with no mention of Google? Picaroon 01:07, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I cite without mentioning Google, referring instead to book and page. Another peoce of possibly (you judge) useful info. In Almanac of African peoples and nations it is written: "According to July, this legend [i. e. Bayajidda] probably refers to a series of southward migrations of Saharan hunters and fisher folks that Hausaland had experinced in the past, leading to a merger with indigenous groups" (p. 351). It also says that the Kano Chronicle narrates that the Kingdom of Kano was founded in 999 by Bayajidda's grandson, Bagauda. (p. 352)--Aldux 16:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Bagauda? That's a new one. According to Lange and the others whose work I've used, Kano founded Kano! I'll use your method of citing Google and will try to expand on the legacy section with information I find via books.google later. Thanks for the recommendation. Picaroon 17:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chad

[edit]

I've been intensively behind this country article since April 19, attempting to provide a good, or at least decent, article. I've (and I hope Brian won't take offence of this ;-)) used as a model the Cameroon FA; I've done my best to be concise (which is not generally one of my best qualities), but mostly I'm worried that the English may not be fluid enough. The last section (culture) is a bit too brief, but I must admit I'm having considerable difficulties finding reliable sources here.--Aldux 00:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brian's review

[edit]

Wow! Very impressive work from Aldux has transformed this page over the past couple months. I went ahead and did an initial copy edit (mostly removing redundant language and clarifying points); I'll try to make another pass as the piece progresses. I also removed a bunch of links that I felt were not particularly relevant to the piece. For example, it's doubtful someone will gain much more understanding of Chad by clicking a link to the Netherlands. Here are the issues that I think remain:

  • Copy editing, especially in the use of Commonwealth vs. American English and in the use of the serial comma. I tried to change all regional English to Commonwealth, but I'm not sure which is preferable here since English isn't a major language in Chad. If necessary, we can check the revision history and change to the variety used by the earliest contributor. I'll try to do more work on this front unless Aldux gets there first.
  • There should be no need for footnotes/references in the lead section of the article. Be sure that all information in the lead is repeated in the article body and cite it there. For example, I don't think the stuff about Lake Chad being Chad's biggest lake and Africa's second largest is repeated in the body.
  • One instance of weasel words remains: ". . . it has been argued that . . . " Please reword this to say exaclty who argues this.
  • There was a lot of history about the administrative subdivisions in that section. I tried to reword things to emphasize how the country is subdivided now, but I may have deleted too much. Take a look.
  • All metric measurements should be accompanied by the equivalent in Imperial units and vice versa.
  • Be sure to insert a non-breaking space between all numbers and units of measurement.
  • Can we get specific months for the wet season and dry season?
  • The discussion of Chad's row with the World Bank over development money smacks of recentism. It would probably be better to boil the dispute down to a few lines at most.
    • Hmm... I'm not sore I fully agree here. I've cut down a bit, but I remain of the opinion that the rupture is an event of great importance for Chadian history and for its future relations with international organizations.--Aldux 15:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, you know more about it than I. I faced a similar problem with Cameroon's treatment of the Bakassi dispute with Nigeria; the issue has dominated (non-football) headlines on Cameroon for the past year or so, but it's hard to judge how important the events are in comparison to things like Fulani jihads or French colonialism. It's a tough balancing act. — Brian (talk) 00:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure I'm comfortable with listing ethnic groups in phrases such as "In the Sahel sedentary peoples, such as the Barma, Kotoko, Kanembu and Bilala, live side-by-side with nomadic ones, such as the Arabs, Daza and Kreda." I tried to avoid this in Cameroon for fear that members of other ethnic groups who edit Wikipedia might insist that their group be listed too. I tried to only mention a group by name if there was another reason to do so (such as Chad's assertion that the Sara are the most numerous group). But that's just my opinion, of course.
    • While I must admit I doubt I'll see many hordes of Chadian editors running to correct this article ;-), I see your point. I've kept the mention of three ethnic groups, as the three most relevant in the respective geographic areas.--Aldux 15:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Make sure the information in the infobox matches the data quoted in the article.
  • Make sure only the first instance of a term is wikilinked and delink the rest (excluding the infobox, lead, and images).
  • Make sure links go where they're supposed to, not to redirects or disambiguation pages.
  • And perhaps the largest problem: The "Culture" section is way too short! I know you said you're having a problem with this part, but this section cannot be comprehensive until it covers at least most of the topics of Chad's literature, film, cuisine, dress, dance, music, and sport. Further sources might be found at Google Books (do a search for each bit, such as Sport in Chad or somesuch). I know that there is a historical dictionary of Chad that can be had used for about $30. The volume from this series on Cameroon was invaluable in writing the Cameroon article.This book, while seemingly aimed at children, might also be of help.
    • While I absolutely agree that the Historical dictionaries are grand, it may be that the scope of Decalo's Historical dictionary of Chad is a bit different from that of the Historical dictionary of Cameroon. This is a book that I've already started using and will use a lot, because without it it would be impossible to move myself in the jungle of rebel and pre-independence factions and leaders; but you won't find anything that can help to fill the culture section there, this is mostly a book of political history. As for the Amazon book, it's a bit too costly and and I'm reluctant to buy a book I would only rarely use. What I mostly miss is a general panoramic, even if I found something good on the Toubous, and more important, this from a Chadian magazine, Tchad et Culture, that has published a dossier titled "L' industrie artistique au Tchad: un trésor mal exploité". Unfortunataly traditional culture is not covered, and I haven't found much on sport.--Aldux 17:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Glad to see the section has beefed up. I think it's adequate now, though it would still be nice to expand it more with information on Chadian writers or filmmakers, and traditional crafts. I guess my recommendation would be to keep looking for more sources, which I'm sure you're already doing. — Brian (talk) 00:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Actually, I hadn't completely finished the section, and what's missing is exactly, as you guessed, a section on writers and cinema. These should be helpful [4],[5].--Aldux 13:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
          • Finished with Culture now, after inserting some info on cinema; generally all the article should be now, for what regards the content side, more or less complete.--Aldux 22:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The stuff on education should probably be moved to the government section. Education is in the national control and is not really an element of culture as Wikipedia country articles define the concept.
  • There are some good images in the article, but there are also some duds. It would be nice if a better image of Déby could be found, and the picture of the Sara girl is kind of boring; she could be a girl at a disco in any country from Senegal to South Africa. Yesterday, I culled public-domain image resources and uloaded a ton of pictures to Wikimedia Commons; see if anything looks promising.

I think this article has taken great strides. With a bit more tender, loving care, I think it will have a good shot at achieiving Featured Article status. Let me know if I can help further. — Brian (talk) 08:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • One additional problem I noted is that the last two footnotes (the ones that reference the Canadian PDF paper) are external jumps. I'd rather see the paper fully cited with author, date, title, publisher, ISBN, etc. The external jump can be embedded with the title. — Brian (talk) 00:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I copy edited the piece one more time. This involved combining or splitting a few paragraphs, so sorry that the changes aren't all that evident by comparing the pre- and post-copy-edit versions. I noticed one final problem: There are several mm rainfall measurements given in the "Geography" section that have no Imperial equivalents. Likewise, there are some parts of that section that use Imperial first and convert to metric rather than the reverse as it should. Once this is fixed, I think the article will be ready for FAC! — Brian (talk) 12:55, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Africa-related_regional_notice_board/Peer_review/2007&oldid=191724163"