Talk:Urwa ibn al-Zubayr/GA1

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

Reviewer: Cplakidas (talk · contribs) 17:33, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

(Criteria marked are unassessed)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):
 * b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a. (reference section):
 * b. (citations to reliable sources):
 * c. (OR):
 * d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * Pass/fail:

Will gladly take this on, but it will be some days before I get to it. Constantine  ✍  17:33, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * To save time, I did some minor copyediting and link addition, feel free to change, revert, or discuss.
 * Thanks for the edits; your ce, like Al Ameer's, is always helpful. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * In the lede it should be added that the Umayyads were based in Syria
 * Done. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * reads odd; Would suggest splitting after the comma.
 * Agreed. I modified the sentence but didn't split out of fear of choppy sentences. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * the he/him here is a tad unclear.
 * Fixed. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * nitpicking, but is any other way possible?
 * I think I've fixed this one too. <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * when is 'now'?
 * Clarified. <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Briefly introduce/contextualize the various scholars mentioned, e.g. Joseph Schacht, Watt (with full name), Andreas Goerke, etc.
 * Done, but I might have screwed up some definite articles there ;) <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * where is Hajar?
 * Clarified and linked. <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Provide a brief explanation of what hijra is.
 * Done. <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Who is the 'he' here?
 * Clarified. <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * you mean the modern historians of early Islam?
 * Yes, specified. <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I assume no relevant images exist? Perhaps a map of the caliphate during his time, to at least give some context?
 * Added Second Fitna map. <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * All sources are high-quality academic WP:RS, by some of the top modern scholars of Islamic studies. Not an expert on the topic, so cannot comment as to coverage of scholarly range of opinion, but a number of different opinions are mentioned in the article.
 * As far as I know, Shoemaker is the only scholar from the skeptical camp who has published a detailed work on the subject. If I find more, I would be glad to add of course. <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Goerke et al 2012 appears not to be used in the article.
 * That article was their response to Shoemaker's criticism, and I had wanted to refer to it briefly, but then ended up not using it out of fear of overusing the work of these two scholars (i.e. Goerke and Schoeler). Hidden for now. <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Anthony and Bewley references lack location.
 * Fixed. <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

That's it. Excellent article, comprehensive and informative, well written and understandable by a non-expert, with impeccable references. A pleasure to review :) Constantine  ✍  13:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Spotcheck reveals no issues, AGF on offline/snippet/paywalled sources.
 * Thank you for the through review Constantine, and for the appreciation, of course :) I think I've addressed all of the points. <i style="color:teal">AhmadLX</i>-(<i style="color:brown">Wikiposta</i>) 21:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Changes look good,, passing now. Constantine  ✍  11:52, 12 May 2023 (UTC)