Talk:Introduction to the Science of Hadith/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 22:21, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

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

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:29, 26 November 2010 (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):
 * The next several chapters relate to the isnād, or chain of narration. Poor prose, "next several" is ungrammatical.
 * A number of subsequent scholars followed Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ in the ordering of his book, from them: "from them"? Do you mean amongst them?
 * From the scholars who spoke highly of the Introduction are: Again mis-use of "from"
 * From the numerous editions of the Introduction in its original Arabic are two of the more reliable:[ and again
 * There are several bulleted lists, these need turning into prose, see Manual of Style (embedded lists) ❌
 * There are still several lists remaining. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:16, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * I assume good faith for all sources which are off-line
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 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):
 * What is the relevance of the image File:Arab. Ms.JPG? It appears to be  just a sample of arabic script and thus contrary to policy, see Images
 * There has been no response to this point. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:16, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, on hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:52, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well there have been a few improvements but two important points remain outstanding so I am not listing this at this time. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:16, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, on hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:52, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well there have been a few improvements but two important points remain outstanding so I am not listing this at this time. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:16, 4 December 2010 (UTC)