Talk:Nabulsi soap/GA1

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


 * This article has been extensively (and in my opinion ably) rewritten following the discovery of copyright issues and a rewrite of same. While it may still be a good article (and I hope it is), it seems like a good idea to reassess, since the content now is very different than the content when it passed. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:19, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Do you want this to go through community reassessment or would you rather do an individual one? AIR corn (talk) 23:37, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * My main concern was broadness given the size of the article. However nothing struck me as missing and a google search did not turn up any major unmentioned issues.
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * Suggestion If the copyright status of File:Nablus 1898.jpg is problematic, it could be replaced by File:Tristram142a.jpg which also shows the city in the 19th century, or File:Twilight in Nablus 154 - Aug 2011.jpg, which shows Nablus today (The soap is still being made there today, so it's not irrelevant). In fact it might even be a better choice, since it's quite a lovely photogtaph and in colour, which gives more visual variety to the page. Voceditenore (talk) 11:18, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've now replaced the problematic image with File:Tristram142a.jpg. Voceditenore (talk) 12:03, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Passed (or re-passed) AIR corn (talk) 22:32, 8 May 2012 (UTC)