Talk:Abdul Amir al-Jamri/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Midnightblueowl (talk · contribs) 21:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC) Oh, you've waited quite a long time for this one. If I may, I'll have a go at reviewing it, unless there are any objections ? Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:52, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

No objections at all. Thank you for taking it and I'm looking forward to your review :) Mohamed CJ (talk) 22:03, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Generally the prose is very good, particularly for someone for whom English is not their first language. There are a few tweaks that could improve it however; for instance, there is no need for the "the-then" which appears twice in the introduction. The reader is already aware that past events are being described, so this wording is largely superfluous. Also in the introduction, we link to Islamism and leftism, so why not liberalism too ? Where you state "A new emir, Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa had succeeded his father. The new emir proposed a reform plan..." you could easily cut it down to "The new emir, Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, proposed a reform plan..." A few other changes could be made to this paragraph, for instance there is no need for "now-king". Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC) In the "Early Life" section, the proper use of English would be to use "a Quranic teacher" and then "taught him the Quran". Rather than "After finishing formal education in Budaiya primary school,[2] al-Jamri, now 12 years old..." try "Al-Jamri finished formal education at Budaiya primary school when he was 12, before becoming...". Change "he left Bahrain to Iraq" to "he left Bahrain for Iraq". In the western world, religious studies is a term used to refer to the academic study of religious beliefs generally, so here it would probably be better to use the term "Islamic studies", to clarify that al-Jamri was only studying Islam, and not other world religions. The name of Al Wasat should be italicised, to fit with Wikipedia's policies. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC) Change "Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq who believed that the prefix "Abdul" should be only used with the name of god" to "Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq, where it was believed that the prefix "Abdul" should only be used with the name of God." When discussing monotheistic conceptions of deity, such as those found in Islam or Christianity, "God" is always capitalised as a sign of respect. You reference Ba'athism, but it would probably be good to be a little clearer on the issue; try "Iraq's Ba'athist regime of Saddam Hussein" perhaps ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:48, 23 August 2013 (UTC) Problems like this persist throughout the text, and I considered it best to make the rest of the changes myself; I hope you do not mind. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:48, 23 August 2013 (UTC) I'm humbled by your words. Looking at your edits to the article, I think I should have submitted it for copy editing first. I've implemented the changes suggested. Mohamed CJ (talk) 12:54, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	There is a bit of an issue with the layout of the page; it has largely been arranged thematically, rather than chronologically. I would advise that it is rearranged so that the events are stated in the chronological order in which they happened, thereby merging the "Early Life" and "Religious studies" sections. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:48, 23 August 2013 (UTC) Done. Mohamed CJ (talk) 13:00, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	No images are currently used; this will have to be rectified. A Google image search has revealed a few images that we could use, so long as we include the correct Fair Use rationale. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC) Perhaps we could also include some images of the protests and/or the Emir ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:08, 23 August 2013 (UTC) I have actually asked Mansoor al-Jamri to provide images for his father. He uploaded some to flickr and I've now added one of them to the article. I've also added another image for the Parliament. As for the 1990s protests, I don't know about any free images available and I'm not sure an image for the Emir is appropriate for the article. There is one image when the king visited him which I think I can get freely published, but it's not really clear. Mohamed CJ (talk) 13:47, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Now that the corrections have been made, this one's a clear pass. Well done Mohamad! Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:28, 24 August 2013 (UTC)