Jump to content

Talk:Kitab al-wadih bi-l-haqq

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk05:01, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Srnec (talk). Self-nominated at 16:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Srnec: Good article. Will have to assume good faith on the offline sources. Onegreatjoke (talk) 04:11, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article Rating[edit]

@Srnec, I rated this article C-class as a starting point; it looks like it could qualify as B-class or higher, but I was leaving the peer-review process to the relevent WikiProjects.
Let me know your thoughts, -Proxima Centari (talk) 23:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't take it personally, but I don't see the point in waiting for what may never come. Many projects have lists of B criteria. A C rating implies some failure against those criteria. But if it hasn't even been checked...? I don't bother with the A-rating, GA and FA processes, but when I write a long(er) article, I aim for a B rating. It is comprehensive, referenced and has pictures. If it doesn't meet even a B standard, I'd like to be told how, so I can remedy it. That's all. Srnec (talk) 03:04, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point. Sometime this coming week I can review it against the lists of B criteria and see where it stands.
Thanks for the reply,
-Proxima Centari (talk) 03:42, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]