Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ayyash Al-Haj/archive1

Ayyash Al-Haj

 * Nominator(s): Free Syrian 200 (talk) 11:04, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

This article is about Syrian leader Ayyash Al-Haj and his family, They fought the French during the French Mandate over Syria with the outbreak of the Great Syrian Revolution in Jabal al-Arab and Ghouta of Damascus for independence.

The French sentenced Ayyash Al-Haj and family to exile to Jableh on the Syrian coast, executed one of his sons and imprisoned another one 20 years, later assassinated Ayyash Al-Haj in his exile.

This article is translated from Arabic and I believe that it satisfies the FA criteria.

Looking forward to any constructive feedback. Free Syrian 200 (talk) 11:04, 23 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose. This is a very new article which needs a bit more work done on it before a run at FAC. There is too much that is unsupported and too much that is not neutral (bordering on hagiographic in places). - SchroCat (talk) 11:14, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Dear SchroCat Thanks for your opinion, Please inform me of the necessary amendments from your point of view to work on them, and regarding of unsupport and neutral, I documented all the information contained in the article, I did not just mention references and sources, but I upload them on the site ( archive.org) for document more.--Free Syrian 200 (talk) 12:06, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * There are too many to go through separately, which is part of the problem: FAC is to apply a final check and polish to articles that are as good as they can be. This article is riddled with fundamental errors throughout. One jarring example is "...practice law in Deir Ezzor, Besides a law, he was appointed a lawyer". Now, comma followed by a capital occurs throughout (this is the sixth example in the text), and "Besides a law" makes no grammatical sense in English when applied to a person - and this is one part of a sentence selected at random. General rule of thumb is that each paragraph in the body should be supported by at least one source, shown at the end: there are seven unsupported paragraphs I could see at a quick look.
 * This article is not right or ready for FAC at this time. It needs to be thoroughly overhauled and taken through lower reviews first (GA, A Class and Peer Review are all good places to get the more obvious wrinkles ironed out, but only after it is given a good copy edit and a check is made that all and every relevant piece of information has been accumulated from every possible reliable source. - SchroCat (talk) 14:40, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Gog the Mild
I am in broad agreement with SchroCat. In particular the article needs fully referencing. It also needs a full copy edit, the prose is nowhere near FA standard. Unless the nominator can do or get done a lot of work on the article quickly I think that this is heading for a quick fail. I would suggest: withdrawing the article; completing the referencing; running the article past GoCE; and work with MilHist to get a B class assessment with a view to a future GAN. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:36, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

SN54129
Also oppose per above, unfortunately. There are large amounts of text lacking sourcing, and the prose is both ungrammatical and often far from neutral. The latter is not just unFACworthy, but against both policy and pillar. —— SerialNumber  54129  12:12, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

-- Laser brain  (talk)  12:21, 24 October 2019 (UTC)