Talk:Afghanistan/GA1

GA Reassessment
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.''

This article has been reviewed as part of WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.


 * The article contains five dead links.


 * Almost all of the Culture section is uncited, Foreign relations is completely uncited, as is Adminstrative regions, European influence and the creation of the state of Afghanistan, and many other important sections.


 * All direct quotations, such as this example: "According to a report filed by Robert Burns of Associated Press on January 16, 2007, ;U.S. military officials cited new evidence that the Pakistani military, which has long-standing ties to the Taliban movement, has turned a blind eye to the incursions.'" must be attributed to their source.


 * Other encyclopedias, such as Britannica, cannot be considerd as suitable sources.


 * There are two citation tags, one of which has been in place since January 2008.


 * "Afghanistan's government is currently fighting an insurgency ...", "Afghanistan and Pakistan recently fought a series of border skirmishes ...". these terms will will age, or may already have aged. How recently? When is/was "currently"?


 * Most of the Foreign relations section, another which is completely uncited, reads more like a propaganda sheet than an encyclopedia article.


 * The Etymology section contains too many short, disjointed paragraphs.


 * "The Soviet occupation resulted in the killings of at least 600,000 to 2 million Afghan civilians." All statistics need to be cited. Is that at least 600,000 or at least 2 million?


 * Images in general should be inside the sections they relate to, not distributed randomly throughout the article. See.


 * All citations need to include full details, specifically publisher, and last access date for web sites.

--Malleus Fatuorum 17:37, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, most, if not all, of these issues will be fixed tomorrow, insha'Allah. -- ♥ pashtun ismailiyya  04:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * There's no rush. If the issues are being addressed then I'm quite happy to extend the deadline for as long as it takes. My aim is to avoid having to delist the article, not to delist it, so thanks for stepping into the breach. I'm not a religious person, so rather than insha'Allah I'll wish you the best of luck, although on reflection there probably isn't that much difference between the two anyway. --Malleus Fatuorum 05:15, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Normally outside of a religious setting I wouldn't use the phrase, but since Wikipedia is such an international project half the users from their dozen or so countries I interact with seem to throw it around. Thanks, I really needed that extension. Let me see what I can do now! -- ♥ pashtun ismailiyya  23:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * This article is about as far from meeting the good article crireria now as it was when this review was opened almost a month ago, so I think the only sensible option is to delist it. It can of course be nominated at WP:GAN just as soon as these issues are fixed, or if you do not agree with my decision a second opinion be requested ar WP:GAR. Thanks for the work that's been done so far. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:49, 6 March 2009 (UTC)