Talk:Imru' al-Qais/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 15:15, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: Two found and fixed, please check that I have chosen the correct targets. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:19, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Linkrot: None found. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:20, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * WP:LEAD suggests a maximum of four paragraphs for the lead.


 * Update: The lead has been brought into compliance with the WP:LEAD. It contains 4 paragraphs.  Word for word, is shorter than the lead for the article on Napoleon Bonaparte, as well as the lead for the article on Winston Churchill-- both Good Articles.Maitham d (talk) 19:08, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Stray sentences need to be consolidated into paragraphs.


 * Update: The most egregious stray sentences have all been consolidated. Maitham d (talk) 18:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I made a number of copy-edits to correct spelling and place references after punctuation as required by the MoS.
 * Prose is good enough to meet the criteria.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Article appears to be adequately referenced, assume good faith for off-line sources.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Sufficient coverage without over detail.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Different historians and literati will surely continue to reinterpret Imru' al-Qais' life and works from a variety of perspectives. What is certain is his importance to the Arab cultural identity and its historical narrative. Unless attributed, this is a point of view statement.
 * I have marked Some[who?] have suggested that Imru' al-Qais could have been influenced by the purported Mazdakism of his grandfather, though there is little direct evidence to support this. as the use of some here is a weasel word.


 * Update: "Different historians..." passage has been deleted. "Some have suggested..." passage has been modified to more accurately reflect the sourcing of the information. Maitham d (talk) 18:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * No images used.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * On Hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:50, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The nominator has asked for extension. Hold extended until 17 March. GAN is not meant to be a lengthy process so this will be the limit. I answer to the nominator's queries, extension granted, you should be able to resolve the who question in seven days, no - images are not required (see WP:GACR for the criteria), compliance with WP:LEAD is a GA criterion. Please leave any further queries or points on this page, thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:42, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I believe that this now passes muster, so I am happy to list as a good article. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 23:18, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I believe that this now passes muster, so I am happy to list as a good article. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 23:18, 11 March 2011 (UTC)