Talk:2003 Casablanca bombings/GA1
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: NAADAAN (talk · contribs) 22:04, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Rollinginhisgrave (talk · contribs) 02:19, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
I'll take this on. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 02:19, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
General comments
[edit]I'll be adding things as I go. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 02:37, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Closing this up to due to nominator inactivity. Hopefully these issues can be addressed and it can be renominated, thankyou! Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 02:19, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Prose/content
[edit]Lede
[edit]and sites near the Belgian consulate and an old Jewish cemetery
The sites were near both the Belgian consulate and an old Jewish cemetery, or there were sites near the consulate and also sites near the cemetery?revendicated
Simpler wordclaiming the lives of
WP:EUPHEMISM33 victims and 12 suicide bombers
in the infobox it says 11 attackers were killed.on the spot
More clearThe attacks came in a rise in radical preachers
ungrammaticalmany of the preachers were veterans of the Soviet-Afghan war
non-sequiturled to the terrorist cell's ringleader
led to the... capture?after following a radical preacher
Bentassir was following the preacher or they were?unclear circumstances
->contested circumstances
The attacks shined light
idiomwith a government initiative fighting against slums
reword for clarityafter a series of attacks in 2007.
clarify who the attacks are on.
Just having gone through the lede, I can see many grammatical issues, and a lack of clarity and colloquial language. Please complete a copyedit of the article before I continue my review of the article, to ensure I am not repeating myself.
Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 02:37, 4 August 2024 (UTC)