Talk:Niqāb in Egypt

Untitled
Hi noosaelgamoosa! Nerdpenguin (talk) 22:33, 17 November 2010 (UTC) here, I wanted to give you some feedback:

The AUC and Al-Azhar controversy sections are great. They break up the article and make it easy to ready.

This is a fascinating article. In addition to being well-written and cited, it is timely and relevant.

Qasim Amin: What was Amin's main thesis? I remember him writing at length in his book that women needed to be educated, be able to leave the home, and enter the workforce. Perhaps including a little of this info to compliment Qasim Amin's point on the veil/niqab. Also, could you mention if he was arguing against the hijab or the niqab, or both?

Huda Shaarawi: when she is first mentioned, could you include a brief explanation of who she is? I see that there is a link to her page, but including here who she is and why she is important would be helpful. Isn't she the wife of someone important in Egypt? I forget. Additionally, you include two spellings of her name Sha'rawi and Shaarawi.

Do you have any quotes from Sadat's final speech that you could include at length? It would be interesting to read a bit of how he ridiculued the niqab.

Again, it was a pleasure. Thank you! Nerdpenguin (talk) 22:33, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Did you know?
This article should be eligible for appearing on the main page as a "Did you know" entry, if it is nominated it soon; it is supposed to be nominated within 5 days of being created or significantly (5x) expanded.

The instructions for nominating it are at Template talk:Did you know. Basically, all you need to do is take this code:

and write the hook, a concise and interesting bit of info from the article beginning with "... that" and ending with a question mark. The info from the hook has to be present in the article and supported (in the article) with a citation. Someone will double-check to make sure the source says what it's claimed to say.

Once you've come up with a hook, fill in your username as the author and fill the title of the article, then add the above code, including your hook following the "hook=" part, to the top of the appropriate section for the day the article was started on the DYK template talk page. The code will produce an entry formatted like the others. After that, just keep an eye on the entry; if anyone brings up an issue with it, try to address it. I'll keep an eye out as well. If everything goes well, it will appear on the Main Page for several hours a few days from now.

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 02:48, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Err, nevermind, it looks like it has already been nominated. So just keep an eye on it, and hopefully it will end up on the main page soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 03:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

More Feedback
Hey there Noosa, you've been doing some great work on this article. I think the selection of images has definitely improved the visual appeal and clarity of the article. It is definitely a viable candidate for Good Article status, though it is important to keep in mind that if the nomination is unsuccessful, the worst that can happen is you get some good feedback, improve the article, and try again.

That being said, here are some ideas on how you can improve the article while you're waiting for the GA review to start:


 * It is a common convention that the title of the article (or a close variation thereof) should appear in bold near the beginning of the introduction. In most cases, this will be in the first sentence, and sometimes even the first words. It is also acceptable to add the bolded text a few sentences later, as can be seen in History of China. The purpose of this practice is to give the reader a very clear understanding of the scope of the article before actually explaining the details.
 * There are several duplicated references that can be consolidated&mdash;see this edit for an idea of what I'm referring to.
 * Every book citation should have the ISBN or ISSN number included and, if available, a link to the corresponding Google Books page. See this edit for an example.
 * Make sure every paragraph ends with a citation, even if the information in a paragraph is covered by a reference used later on. In particular, Upper-class women's discussion on the burqu' needs more citations.
 * Try to avoid one- and two-sentence paragraphs, such as "While there are no official figures on how many women wear the niqāb in Egypt today, the practice has become increasingly widespread in recent years." Such snippets should be merged into other paragraphs, expanded, or deleted.
 * Be sure to maintain a neutral and encyclopedic tone throughout the article. Example: "In response to Egypt's catastrophic loss to Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War" The use of "catastrophic" implies a very strong pro-Egypt bias. Consider employing a milder adjective or simply dropping the word altogether.
 * On a similar note, try to avoid colloquialisms and informal phrasings, such as "The Islamists were also inflamed by a new law". Although most readers will understand what this means, "inflamed" has a particular meaning that does not strictly apply to this sentence. "Irritated" or "agitated" may be a better choice.

Hope this helps! --Cryptic C62 · Talk 19:17, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

comments
Impressive job. The flow from history to contemporary issues is very well done and readable. A huge amount of information there that is well organized and clear. Radavis147 (talk) 13:05, 6 December 2010 (UTC)