Talk:Goy/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: Atrapalhado
Reviewer: Spinixster (talk · contribs) 02:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'll be reviewing this article based on the Good Article criteria and related guidelines. I am not experienced in this topic, so the full review would take a while.
Initial things
[edit]- Merge proposal: There is currently a merge proposal on the page. The consensus seems to be a redirect, though, since the other article is already mentioned in this one, so I don't think it will affect this article too much.
- Copyvio: 52.2% similarity, although most of it is common phrases and attributed quotes. It is not a problem, but I'd encourage paraphrasing some parts in order to make the percentage lower.
- IMPORTANT! Sourcing needs to be improved. Much of the article relies on questionable sources, such as "biblestudytools.com" and Chabad.org, which per this discussion is only reliable for statements related to the Chabad movement. I think this can easily be replaced with better ones. I'd also encourage using more scholarly sources, especially more recent ones; Google Scholar and The Wikipedia Library can help.
Prose changes
[edit]- Lead: The lead should be a summary of the whole article. Parts from the lead that are not mentioned in the body should be moved accordingly. (WP:LEAD)
- Image Similar to Allah, I would add an image of the word in Hebrew on top so that the article is illustrated.
I've decided to stop the review here. Many of the sources are unreliable/questionable as said above (ex. Israel Today/Israel Hayom, which is not a RS per discussions at WP:RSN). These can easily be swapped with more scholarly/more reliable sources, again, as said above. However, I expect the changes to affect the article drastically, so I'll be marking this review as on hold to give you some time to swap these sources and add more information if needed. If you have any questions, please ask. Spinixster (chat!) 01:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Atrapalhado, I see you have been editing but not on this article, so I'm pinging to ask if you have seen my comments. Spinixster (chat!) 01:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- As it has been 12 days since I've put this review on hold, 9 since I've pinged the nominator, and 7 since the nominator last edited, I will be failing this article. Spinixster (trout me!) 14:13, 31 March 2024 (UTC)