Talk:Terrorist Recognition Handbook/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 13:28, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:28, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

• The official website is a dead link.

The link works for me. Could you check again? Bennv3771 (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

• The "Further reading" section uses Harvard anchors, but the citations are not set up to point to them; this is not really a references section, rather a list of books by Nance, so use "ref=none" to disable the Harvard anchors. Are all these books relevant to this article? The Plot to Hack America appears unrelated, for example.

I removed the books already listed (and cited) in the article. Added "ref=none", but I'm not quite sure how it works so you'd better check if I did it correctly. Bennv3771 (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

• The list of "See also" is very long; some of these could probably be cut. It should be limited to articles that are directly related to the topic of this article but not linked; why do we need a link to Arab Spring, for example?

I removed articles for topics not directly mentioned. Similarly, I removed the Syrian civil war and ISIL navigation templates as these are not mentioned/sourced in the article. Bennv3771 (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

• The summary section is full of "The author explains... The author asserts... Nance writes... He suggests..." Much of this can go; the reader understands they're reading a summary.

I rewrote the summary section based on the sources cited. I hope that adequately addresses the last four points. Bennv3771 (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

• The work received a book review from Kevin H. Govern of the Ave Maria School of Law published in the Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. If this is worth mentioning in the lead, tell us what the review says; and I see details are not given in the body either.

I do not have access to this journal so I removed mention of the review. Bennv3771 (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

• The author illustrates his points with charts: too vague to be useful; cut it or give more details.
• explanations of combustible materials: do you mean descriptions? Or perhaps explanations of how they work?
• a reference to existing terrorist networks: unclear; this is a list?
• Europe (and the United Kingdom): well, yes, the UK is in Europe. What's the point of the parenthesis?

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:50, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Sagecandor, are you planning to work on this? If not I'll fail the article in another week. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:13, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Mike Christie: I've made the above changes based on your review. I hope they adequately address issues you raised. Bennv3771 (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

The article is much improved. The official page is still dead for me, but it's not a requirement to fix that for GA. Thanks for fixing this; I'm promoting it to GA. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:49, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Mike Christie Ah I just realized the official page has a country option at the top. When I open the link it automatically goes to my country's version which is still working, but the United States option goes to a dead link. I'll update the link so it should work for all countries. Bennv3771 (talk) 05:35, 24 February 2018 (UTC)