Talk:Deir al-Balah/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 00:34, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

• I'll review this! MathewTownsend (talk) 00:34, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

review

• according to the link checker, there are two links needing disambiguation: Crusader and Victor Guerin

Done. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• lede -

• per lead: "The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview. It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points."
• "Well known for its beaches and date palms, recent archaeological excavations uncovered an ancient Egyptian cemetery in Deir al-Balah dating back to the Late Bronze Age." - the first part of the sentence has nothing to do with the second part.

Rewrote the bit, how does it look now? --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• "Hilarion" - in lede, perhaps some context e.g. the Christian monk Hilarion"

Done. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• "dedicated to al-Khidr or Saint George." - confusing in lede although somewhat explained under "Etymology"

Reworded to clarify. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• Could you clarify in the lead when it began to be called Palestine?

Kind of complicated, I'll discuss it below. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• "Under Egyptian control Deir al-Balah"

• "while in Islamic tradition al-Khidr could either refer to Saint George or Elijah. The inhabitants of Deir al-Balah associated al-Khidr with the former." - the former meaning Saint George?

Yes, I clarified, although I hope it doesn't sound redundant now. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• under "Ancient period:

• "According to local tradition and observations from Western travelers, the site of the Monastery of Hilarion is currently occupied by the Mosque of al-Khidr" - does this refer to that period, or to travelers from this century?

Clarified. It refers to travelers from the 19th-century. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• needs more explanation - is there other info that support this e.g. archeology?

I could explain it more. Basically it's supported by Victor Guerin's observations of the mosque's prayer hall which contains capitals that he believes belongs to a Byzantine church and the local tradition. It's still not for sure, but that's why I attribute. Should I go into details in the "Ancient period" section or the "Ottoman era" section since that's where I mention Guerin's visit? --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• "The site was one of the first places in Palestine to be annexed by the Rashidun Caliphate following the conquest of Gaza by Amr ibn al-'As in 634" - was it considered Palestine then?

See below. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• Crusader and Ayyubid rule

• "According to William of Tyre" - some context for who he is? - like "the medieval chronicler"

Done. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• context for "Saladin" (in general, adding context for the first mention of a person helps orient the reader)

Clarified. Just to explain a bit here, in this section he is mentioned twice. In the first mention he serves the Fatimid Caliphate and in the second he is the sultan of his own empire. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Ottoman era

• "With an estimated population of 1,500,[8] it was one of eight villages at the time to have between 1,000 and 2,000 inhabitants." - were there villages/cities with greater population, or is this the top end?

Good question. These 8 villages were the middle-tier localities. There were 8 other villages with higher populations. Should I just scrap the second half of that sentence and replace it with "it was the eleventh largest village in Palestine"? --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• "Deir al-Balah's mortality rate suffered in 1862 due to stagnant drinking water." - maybe add some info on the water situation in general there.

Added more context to the situation. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• In general, could it be clarified when it became Palestine? Was it called Palestine from the beginning?

Palestine here refers to the area of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories, more or less. In the Bronze Age it was known as Canaan (which the article refers to), the Byzantines called it Palaestina, the early Muslim Arab empires called Jund Filastin, the Crusaders called it the Kingdom of Jerusalem, the Ayyubids referred to it as Palestine, and the Ottomans officially called it Southern Sham or Syria. Palestine is just the English term for that region. However, each time Palestine is mentioned in the article, usage of the term is backed by the source. For example in the Etymology section the source (Sharon p. 14) states "Saint George is the most venerated local saint in Palestine." In the Ancient period section, the source (Bittony-Ashkelony p. 68) mentions Hilarion's monastery as "the first eremitic [hermit] community in Palestine." In the Ottoman era section, Palestine is not mentioned in the source nor is any other place so I just put Palestine for context. In the rest of the first passage Palestine is specifically used by the source (Petersen throughout the book) even though in the time period that is being discussed, Palestine was divided into the Sanjak of Gaza, Sanjak of Acre and Sanjak of Nablus and not under one single administration. An exception is the part about the Muslim Arab capture of the town in the Ancient period section. The source (Sharon p. 12) says "it was one of the places that was occupied by the Muslim armies in the early stage of the Muslim invasion of Byzantine Syria in the year 634." Here "Palestine" is used for convenience and could be changed to "Byzantine Syria" if more suitable.

(will continue)

MathewTownsend (talk) 15:43, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

(continue)

• "infrastructure previously established by the Crusaders" - has this been mentioned/clarified before?

What's mentioned previously is the suburb or village founded by the Crusaders outside the fortress of Darum. Apparently, after the fort's final demolition in 1196, this village continued on, but without the fort's protection. It continued to thrive during early Ottoman rule as a result of the Crusader's initial set up. --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• "dunum" - how much land is this?

Clarified, I think. 1 dunums is 1,000 square meters or 0.1 hectares. --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• can't figure out why ref 49 is screwed up - something wrong with the formatting

Fixed it. --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• Roy, p. 144. - Roy isn't in the Bibliography

Done. --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• Everything else looks good. A very interesting article. Will put on hold.

MathewTownsend (talk) 20:50, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• is this image of interest to you?

  

  Ottoman Empire: Palestine. Near Belah.

MathewTownsend (talk) 00:24, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments and yes that image is certainly of interest! I just added it to the article. Let me know if the caption is accurate. --Al Ameer son (talk) 01:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

re caption

The caption on the Commons is the following: "Ottoman Empire: Palestine. Near Belah. A battery of the Honourable Artillery Company attached to the 4th Australian Light Horse Brigade. The gun crews are crouched between their 13 pounder quick fire field guns and a cactus hedge."

It seems the Australian 4th Light Horse Brigade was part of the British Army? Belah is piped to Deir al-Balah MathewTownsend (talk) 14:58, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll make the adjustment in the caption. As for your question in your recent edit summary, the fort did come first, but the village itself was founded during Crusader rule and continued on despite the fort's final destruction by the Ayyubids. However, your edit is still technically true since it only became a "large" village during Mamluk and early Ottoman rule. --Al Ameer son (talk) 16:50, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:

   b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:

   b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:

   c. no original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.

   fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   no edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Pass!

• Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 18:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the thorough review and passing the article! --Al Ameer son (talk) 19:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)