Talk:Mansoor al-Jamri

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mansoor al-Jamri/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ColonelHenry (talk · contribs) 21:41, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I will be doing a review of this article. I've read through it twice now and am impressed by how comprehensive and well-prepared this nomination is. --ColonelHenry (talk) 21:41, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your review. I'll address your points shortly. Mohamed CJ (talk) 08:13, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Comments

• There are several short sections, MOS:PARAGRAPHS states that section "usually consist of paragraphs of running prose" (emphasis is mine on plural paragraghs) and that "Short paragraphs . . . generally do not warrant their own subheading". Three examples:
  • In the "Early life and career" section, the "Adult life" section is short in comparison with the other section about childhood years. Have you thought about combining them and renaming the section "early life and education" since that seems to be more of the focus? IMHO, the "Adult life" section is just on the borderline of being too short to be a stand-alone section. Other editors might think it too short.
  • "Return to Al-Wasat" section at one paragraph seems rather short and should be merged into the "Suspension of Al-Wasat and resignation of al-Jamri" section.
  • "Publications" section is two sentences, per MOS, is it possible to incorporate some extended discussion on the release of his two books--how critics received them, their impact, their themes and message--and the impact of his article writing into sections above regarding his career. Typically, a publications or works section is usually a bibliographic list.

This is an excellent article and I'm glad to come across it.--ColonelHenry (talk) 01:22, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the many compliments. I think I've addressed all of your comments up there. The Publications section is now expanded, let me know if you think it needs more work. Mohamed CJ (talk) 09:02, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

• I don't see anything that needs work. This is one of the best-prepared Good Article nominations that I've seen in a while. I will be promoting it forthwith.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is clear and concise, without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   The mode of English is not typically American or British English which is more prevalent on Wikipedia. The construction is the English idiom spoken in the Middle East (I lived in Dubai and recognize the idiom), but nevertheless, this article is well-written.

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   I see no major issues regarding MOS compliance, and I'm sure the minor issues raised above regarding layout will be quickly addressed. The article has an excellent lede that complies with WP:LEDE. I do have a few questions regarding layout mentioned above, but they are more suggestions--I do not feel those questions in the long-term hold up this article's worthiness for GA status but I do see that the nominator will addressing my concerns/remarks raised above. The language is incredibly neutral, and non-POV. The fiction writing and list incorporation MOS considerations mentioned in the GA criteria are not relevant to reviewing this article.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   Article contains a very comprehensive array of international sources. Citations are meticulously complete and consistent per MOS.

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

   I do not see any indications of original research.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

   Article covers the major aspects of the life and career of Mr al-Jamri with excellent balance of breadth, content and summary style.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   This article is entirely neutral. I do not see any biases or undue weight given to any viewpoint.

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   Article is stable, and I don't see any edit wars or content disputes. Nominator has been primary contributor since June, and responsible for over 65% of article size/content.

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   I am not entirely certain at first glance that the images provided are properly tagged/derived/originated and I will have to look deeper or consult a second opinion as to their copyright status.

• Confirmed. Image of Bahrain protests free at source via CC3.0. Attempting to locate source copyright for flickr image.
• Confirmed. Image of al-Jamri is free at source via CC2.0.

1. B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   both images are relevant to the article and have suitable captions.

2. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   (31AUG13)STANDBY until copyright status of images and issues regarding paragraphs listed above are addressed. (02SEP13)

REVIEWER'S COMMENT - I categorized al-Jamri as a Magazines and print journalism good article. It was nominated under the Politics and government category. I think the former journalism category is more appropriate.--ColonelHenry (talk) 17:05, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mansoor al-Jamri. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130927192438/http://www.alternatifpolitika.com/page/docs/Kasim_2010_Ozel_Sayi_1/Tam_Metin/Mansoor_AL-JAMRI.pdf to http://www.alternatifpolitika.com/page/docs/Kasim_2010_Ozel_Sayi_1/Tam_Metin/Mansoor_AL-JAMRI.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:29, 1 June 2017 (UTC)