Talk:Chakh Akhriev/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sawyer-mcdonell (talk · contribs) 19:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Assessment

 * This is not a requirement for GA status, just my own suggestion: Per MOS:SURNAME, After the initial mention, a person should generally be referred to by surname only. The article consistently refers to Akhriev with his personal name, Chakh, which is something to change if you aim for FA status in the future.
 * I would merge the "background" and "childhood" sections into an "early life" section, and probably rename the "early collecting period" section to something like "Ethnography career", as that is clearer to the reader. The "critical reception" and "legacy" sections could be merged as well, and the "works" section moved to the end of the article for ease of reading.
 * I would merge the "background" and "childhood" sections into an "early life" section, and probably rename the "early collecting period" section to something like "Ethnography career", as that is clearer to the reader. The "critical reception" and "legacy" sections could be merged as well, and the "works" section moved to the end of the article for ease of reading.
 * I would merge the "background" and "childhood" sections into an "early life" section, and probably rename the "early collecting period" section to something like "Ethnography career", as that is clearer to the reader. The "critical reception" and "legacy" sections could be merged as well, and the "works" section moved to the end of the article for ease of reading.


 * In general the sourcing looks alright; I can't read most of it but my spotchecks using machine translation show good text-source integrity. A lot of the sources are Ingushetia-based newspapers, which I'm not confident in the neutrality of; it may be better to replace citations to Serdalo and Ingushetia with more academic citations where possible. There are several citations in the "sources" section that are not actually cited inline in the text: Akhrieva 1968, Dakhkilgov 1975, Dzarakhova 2010, and Yandarov 1968 - these could probably be used to fill out the article a little more, or even put into a "further reading" section.
 * In general the sourcing looks alright; I can't read most of it but my spotchecks using machine translation show good text-source integrity. A lot of the sources are Ingushetia-based newspapers, which I'm not confident in the neutrality of; it may be better to replace citations to Serdalo and Ingushetia with more academic citations where possible. There are several citations in the "sources" section that are not actually cited inline in the text: Akhrieva 1968, Dakhkilgov 1975, Dzarakhova 2010, and Yandarov 1968 - these could probably be used to fill out the article a little more, or even put into a "further reading" section.
 * In general the sourcing looks alright; I can't read most of it but my spotchecks using machine translation show good text-source integrity. A lot of the sources are Ingushetia-based newspapers, which I'm not confident in the neutrality of; it may be better to replace citations to Serdalo and Ingushetia with more academic citations where possible. There are several citations in the "sources" section that are not actually cited inline in the text: Akhrieva 1968, Dakhkilgov 1975, Dzarakhova 2010, and Yandarov 1968 - these could probably be used to fill out the article a little more, or even put into a "further reading" section.




 * It may lean a little towards eulogizing in the "critical reception" section, but since the quoted people are notable (have Russian articles), their perspectives on Akhriev may be as well. Let me know what you think!

✅


 * @WikiEditor1234567123 Hi! I've completed my initial review. I'll continue looking over the article in case I notice anything else or have any other suggestions. Thanks for your nomination! sawyer  * he/they *  talk  06:53, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @WikiEditor1234567123 Hi! I've completed my initial review. I'll continue looking over the article in case I notice anything else or have any other suggestions. Thanks for your nomination! sawyer  * he/they *  talk  06:53, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @WikiEditor1234567123 Hi! I've completed my initial review. I'll continue looking over the article in case I notice anything else or have any other suggestions. Thanks for your nomination! sawyer  * he/they *  talk  06:53, 2 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello! I've fixed most of the issues. I don't think there's any problem with using Serdalo and Ingushetia newspaper articles as they're not only the most reliable newspaper of Ingushetia, but also those 2 articles are written by Zeinep Dzarakhova, an ethnographer and a doctor of historical sciences. Regarding Dakhkilgov 1975 and Yandarov 1968, I added these sources because I wanted to make a section about Akhriev's views, but had never the time to do that. What do you think, should I make that section? And thanks for beginning the review! Best regards, WikiEditor123… 10:34, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Great to know about the newspapers - then I definitely have no issue with the use of those. I think a section about Akhriev's views would be great! It would flesh out the article just a bit more. Great work! :) sawyer  * he/they *  talk  01:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I've made the section, see here. Are there any more issues with the article? Best regards, WikiEditor123… 09:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me! Congrats :) sawyer  * he/they *  talk  19:27, 3 March 2024 (UTC)