Talk:Democratic Left Movement (Lebanon)

Name

Should this not be at Democratic Left Movement (Lebanon) or Movement of the Democratic Left? Palmiro | Talk 14:24, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

There's neither an official translation or website for this movement, nor a WP naming convention about party and movement related articles, so I think you're free to change the title. CG 20:36, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

it's the same name, isn't it? but i'm okay with the merger, go ahead. there is an official web site though: www.democratic-left.org. there, the name is given in the heading as just "the democratic left(ist)", but that is probably an abbreviated form, since it is at other places in the page written as "democratic left(ist) movement in lebanon". Arre 18:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

update on that: they abbreviate themselves as DLM in english, as in "DLM radio".

Definition needed

Could someone define the word "courant", as used in "However, DLM supports the existence of courants ..." and in several instances following. teneriff 03:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lebanese democratic left movement.jpg

Image:Lebanese democratic left movement.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:30, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Additional peer review comments (July 2009)

The following are additional comments I intended to raise at the peer review, which was closed before I got back to it:-

• History section - Foundation

**Suggest change section name to "Early history", as it only deals with the foundation in September 2004, and the assassinations a year later.

 Done

**To avoid repetitions of the full title "Lebanese Communist Party" I have introduced the acronym "LCP" a few times, or otherwise referred to "the party"

 Done

• • "These activists and intellectuals who split from the LCP..." Is this the same group who, in the previous paragraph, called itself "the reform and democracy forces in the Lebanese Communist Party"? When did they formally split from the LCP?
  • You refer to the DLM being established at a ceremony "in September 2004". Can we have the actual date of this ceremony?: Done

*Assassinations: Why the multiple citations in the first sentence? Simple matters of fact need only a single, reliable source. As it stands, the sentence is difficult to read. Same point arises in the second paragraph.

• The Structure and composition section has one brief subsection on internal elections, but tells us nothing of the DML's structure and composition. In the Internal elections subsection:-

**The word "own" in the first sentence is unnecessary : Done

• • The term "National Assembly", in this usage, needs a bit of explanation. I take it to be the ruling committee of the new party, but this needs to be clarified.

**Rather than "not lose", say "retain": Done

• • "...while insisting on being a part of March 14." What does this mean?
  • Final sentence needs further clarification. The voting percentages don't really tell us anything - you haven't given percentages for Atallah's lot. How many seats in the Assembly did each group win?
• Political stances

**Ideology: "Thus, the DLM's ideology is a broad leftist platform that forms the common denominator among its constituents." Whose summary is this? If it is part of the Majed interview, it ought to be attributed to him. **Domestic Policy: Wording like "one of the few parties", "vehemently", "strongly" give this section a POV feel. You need to remove non-neutral adjectives to remain encyclopedic. : Done

• Political activities

**Cedar revolution: POV - suggest delete "unprecedented" and change "meddling" to "interference". Also, is "presumably from Syria" part of the stated goal, or is this editorial assumption? : Done **Electoral results: "Representing the Maronite seat of Tripoli..." doesn't make sense (a seat representing a seat?) Rewording required. Also, this is the fourth mention of the March 14 Alliance, without any explanation of what it is. : Done

Hope these comments help. Brianboulton (talk) 19:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm working on it. Mnation2 (talk) 03:18, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Democratic Left Movement (Lebanon)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Review process started. Yazan (talk) 05:41, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

This a well-written compact article, good job!

Nonetheless, there are a few issues that need to be fixed before it can be promoted to GA:

• For a short article the lead is quite long, I would suggest slimming it down a little bit.

 Done

The lead looks much better. My concern was not as much how long it is but about sections like Hawi's assasination which I still think should be removed because the lead is supposed to focus fully on the DLM (and it is mentioned elsewhere in the article). Another thing you might want to take note of, since the lead only summarizes the article and (I suppose) everything in the lead is already referenced in the article, you might want to take out unnecessary refs to reduce clutter. Other than that it looks good.Yazan (talk) 05:53, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I got rid of all citations for uncontroversial claims cited elsewhere in the article. As for the assassinations, I was specifically told in the peer review I received for this article that they must be included in the lead as it summarizes the contents of the article and does not just provide context for the subject.Mnation2 (talk) 03:07, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, the assassination of Kassir certainly belongs there, but not Hawi. Hawi was maybe an ally, a personal friend to many in the movement, but he had no active role in it (if he did, then you must specify it and its importance later in the article). Yazan (talk) 03:11, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Hawi, as the article states, campaigned for Elias Atallah in the DLM's electoral debut during Lebanon's 2005 elections (and was killed a day after Atallah was elected). He also, as the Ziad Majid interview states, "was trying to bring the communist party, or at least part of it, to join efforts" with the DLM. What else needs to be said? Mnation2 (talk) 15:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I guess the lead looks good now. It's not a major detail anyway, but I still don't think Hawi's assasination should be in the lead, but if that's what you prefer... Yazan (talk) 02:27, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

• The history section needs a little expansion. There's a little gap between Foundation and the Cedar Revolution. What was the movement's role in the Lebanese crisis before the Hariri assassination. What were their alliances, etc. etc.

 Done

• The cedar revolution section should be a part of the History section.

 Done

• Please expand the general elections section with actual numbers and percentage of votes.

 Done

• Maybe you can also add a photo of Kassir, since it's very relevant to this article.

 Done

• The structure and composition section needs expansion as well. The section only mentions the last internal elections, but it doesn't explain the mechanism and internal structure (How many members is the National Assembly, how is it elected, it mentions that people outside of lebanon were able to participate (how?), what other organizational structures (other than the National Assembly) are part of the movement, etc. etc.). Does the movement have any publications, media outlets? It should be mentioned as well. Maybe a little overview also about the demographics of the movement members (number, age groups, any internal currents? (not necessary but quite helpful)).

 Done

I'm going to sleep for tonight and will finish this section within twelve hours. If you could refrain from the review until then, I would be incredibly grateful. Thanks, Mnation2 (talk) 05:02, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no worries. You've put in a wonderful effort on this article. Good luck, Yazan (talk) 05:22, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

• In general the article meets the NPOV guidelines, but it should expand on critiques of the movement (I know there's quite a bit, especially from the far left). For example, what was the LCP's reaction to the movement after its foundation (it only mentions that Atallah was expelled)?

 Done

• (Update): Maybe you should also mention some reference to the physical address of the movement, where does it operate from? HQ?

 Done

• Comment: The statement about DLM being the first leftist party with representatives in the parliament might be a little misleading. Progressive Socialist Party of Junblatt, is also a leftist party (namely), and a member of the Socialist international. Maybe you could specify more (secular, etc.)

 Done

I am putting the article on hold for 7 days until these issues are addressed. Feel free to contact me when you feel that the issues are resolved. Happy editing. Yazan (talk) 06:20, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for starting the review! I've trimmed the lead a bit and moved the cedar revolution section to history for now, but will be out of town for the next few days. I should be back in time to complete the recommended changes before 7 days has passed. Thanks again, Mnation2 (talk) 19:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Very well, good luck.Yazan (talk) 05:53, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I'm done. =) Let the review commence! Mnation2 (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

I am glad to promote this to GA-status. You've put great work in here, and its been a pleasure reviewing it. Would love to see this happens to more articles in WP-Lebanon. Best, Yazan (talk) 16:20, 6 August 2009 (UTC)