Jump to content

Talk:Qarmatian invasion of Iraq

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

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Qarmatian invasion of Iraq/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Catlemur (talk · contribs) 20:06, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


I will begin this review shortly.--Catlemur (talk) 20:06, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • You mention that the Qarmatians were Shia and that other Shia sympathizers flocked to Bahrayn. I think you need to also mention that the Abbasids were Sunni to better contextualize the conflict between the two.
    • Done, but caveat: in 900, calling the Abbasids 'Sunni' is not entirely correct. As the article mentions, there were several Shi'a sympathizers in high posts in the Abbasid government, and even some caliphs toyed with Shi'a sympathies. Sunnism did not really coalesce until the Sunni Revival in the 11th century.
  • for 7 days → for seven days per MOS:NUMERAL
    • Done.
  • "to confront the Qarmatian menace" - reword this
    • Why? What is the problem?
I feel like the wording is non neutral in this case.--Catlemur (talk) 17:46, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Catlemur, I've dealt with most of the issues above. Please have a look. Apart from the one unclear point above, is there anything else? Constantine 18:57, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cplakidas: I apologize. I got really busy IRL.--Catlemur (talk) 17:46, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Catlemur: No worries, take your time. Constantine 18:31, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Catlemur: a small reminder. Constantine 11:49, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cplakidas: I moved to a new place and got screwed over by the telecom company, got internet yesterday. I will finish the review in the coming days.--Catlemur (talk) 15:12, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Catlemur: Oh wow, sorry to hear that. Please don't stress yourself on my account, I just wanted to know if you're still on it. Best of luck with everything! Constantine 15:28, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is an inconsistent Engvar is the article, I assume you are going for British English. That means that the following alterations must be made:

stabilizing→stabilising sympathizer→sympathiser mobilize→mobilise mobilization→mobilisation recognized→recognised

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail: Catlemur (talk) 17:49, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 (talk03:43, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Improved to Good Article status by Cplakidas (talk). Self-nominated at 18:22, 20 May 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: No - I'm not convinced ALT1 meets this requirement, but ALT0 looks ok.
QPQ: Done.
Overall: Nice article (t · c) buidhe 01:44, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]