Talk:Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists/GA1

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

Reviewer: Kees08 (talk · contribs) 17:01, 30 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Kees08: Thanks for the review. It appears that you are dealing with in a precise manner. Regarding the timeline I also think that graphically showing the points is more interesting. However, I'm not sure if it's right to separate the details. How about reflecting them in a table? On the reaction table, I prefer to separate state and non-state reactions. Also, I have no idea why a separate section is dedicated to Ardeshir Hosseinpour, among others. -- M h hossein   talk 13:42, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * A table will be fine, assuming we are thinking of the same thing. I do not know why he has his own reaction section either; if he has his own, they should all have their own probably. I'll wait to finish the review until some of the previous comments are addressed and we get a little closer to completion. Kees08 (talk) 23:12, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Response to the review

 * ✅ The grammar issues was resolved .  M h hossein   talk 13:15, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ A pic was inserted. I'm seeking for more pics. -- M h hossein   talk 13:15, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 * More pics added. -- M h hossein   talk 13:08, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Early closure

 * Kees08: Did you fail the nomination? I though that the discussion were ongoing. I meant to reshape the timeline section! -- M h hossein   talk 15:10, 5 January 2017 (UTC)


 * No, I saw that. Legobot must be confused, I did not fail it. Kees08 (talk) 18:15, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * This was due to the article being moved earlier today, and then moved back. While it was moved, the article name no longer matched the name of this review page, thus a disconnect and the (mistaken) assumption by Legobot that the review had failed because it had disappeared. Now that the article has been moved back, all is well; if it moves again more permanently, the review page will also need to be moved. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:05, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Table

 * Kees08: How is this table in your viewpoint? -- M h hossein   talk 17:04, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I am a little undecided on how that section should look in general. It could probably stay as-is or have the table added. The important thing with that section is that it gets expanded greatly. The article is about assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists, but there is only a small list describing the attacks. If the article was titled 'Reactions to assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists,' it would be fine the way it is. Does that make sense? So in general the big thing I care about is a large expansion of the assassinations themselves. Kees08 (talk) 17:05, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I think I can understand you better now! -- M h hossein   talk 18:50, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm dealing with the suggestion. -- M h hossein   talk 19:04, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I checked it out, definitely going the right direction. Would you be fine if I failed it, then when you resubmit it you can just let me know and I'll take it up right away? I try not to have too many reviews open at once. Let me know if you would rather not. Thanks! Kees08 (talk) 03:23, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Conclusion
I am going to fail this for now, but when you renominate please ping me and I'll take the review again. I think once you finish up what you are doing it will be very close to a GA. Thanks! Kees08 (talk) 19:25, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Kees08: Thanks for your suggestions. I was busy with real life but will keep on the job. I'll ping you when ever I'm done. -- M h hossein   talk 12:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Great! Don't be discouraged by the 'fail,' we'll get this thing to GA soon enough. Kees08 (talk) 13:48, 23 January 2017 (UTC)