Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Yarmouk/archive1


 * The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not promoted. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Battle of Yarmouk

 * Nominator(s): الله أكبر  Mohammad Adil 

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because... I just nominated it for the FA class article and there some body advised me to list this article first for the A class military history article, so here it is. الله أكبر Mohammad Adil  22:26, 4 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Object because of large unsourced sections. Also the page numbers in teh cites are in various formats. Which one do you want to use. Also. The images of the maps, why are they in galleries that break up the flow of the page and leave lots of whitespace when they could just be done normally aligned??  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket ) (help the Invincibles Featured topic drive) 05:54, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Oppose – sorry, but there are just too many issues with the article at present, such as: Please do not be discouraged by all of this, however, and continue to work on the article. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 06:49, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Dates should be singular, and not use such things as "st", "nd", "rd" or "th".
 * Endashes (–) are required between date ranges used in the article in place of general dashes (-). Same with page ranges used in citations.
 * Subheadings should not begin with "The".
 * Images should not be aligned to the left directly under a level three subheading.
 * Images require alt text.
 * As YellowMonkey points out, there are large sections of unreferenced text and image issues.


 * Oppose - citations. Per WP:MH/A, "all claims are verifiable against reputable sources". Having said that, you have done some good work on the article; I hope you and can keep it up! Some other comments:
 * Current ref 3 (Akram 2004) needs (a) page number(s).
 * Citation styles need to be consistent, for example ref 12 "Yarmouk 636, Muslim conquest of Syria, By David Nicolle page 1" or ref 27 "Walter Kaegi, "Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests page: 131"
 * For a future FAC, I don't know if http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/index.html would meet the "high-quality" criterion of WP:FA?
 * What makes http://www.renaissance.com.pk/jaletf95.html and http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/muslimwars/articles/yarmuk.aspx a reliable source?
 * http://www.ccel.org/ccel/gibbon/decline/volume2/chap512.htm needs to be cited as being from The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire with the link acting as a convenience link.
 * Hope these help. All the best, — Ed   (talk  •  contribs)  02:29, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

الله أكبر Mohammad Adil  15:00, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I have tried to resolve all the issues mentioned above, check the article now.
 * The citations are looking much better! Couple more things: current ref 81 ("al-Waqidi, p.148.") needs to be formatted with harvnb (and is it in the bibliography?), and current ref 100 ("Ibid., p. 17,") should not use ibid. I've struck my oppose over citations, and I hope you can address the prose-related opposes. Good luck! Regards, — Ed   (talk  •  contribs)  06:32, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. It is badly in need of a copy-edit. Many phrases don't make much sense, are unclear, or are gramatically incorrect. Please request one at one of the copy-editing request boards and have that done thoroughly. – Joe   N  19:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

@user:Joe_N, i have made request for the copy-edits lets see when they respond. الله أكبر Mohammad Adil  10:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * @user:the_ed17, i have fixed the references tht u pointed out.
 * Okay, but why do very old sources (eg 8th century) appear in the "Modern sources" section? ;-) — Ed   (talk  •  contribs)  01:10, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

الله أكبر Mohammad Adil  10:24, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * opps my bad... just fixed it. and as for copy-edit, User:Unflavoured have did it.


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.