Talk:Lajjun/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
- Starting GA review.Pyrotec (talk) 19:54, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Intial review
[edit]The text looks reasonable; but there are no images or any "map". Is this a consequence of the security situation?Pyrotec (talk) 21:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- As far as pictures, there are several out there but none of them could be uploaded since they've all been taken less than 50 years ago (per BM Palestine/Israel's public domain requirements). Unfortunately we (myself and Huldra) have not been able to find any painting of Lajjun/Legio/Maximianpolis either. I have emailed two people for permission to use the pictures, but have not gotten any replies. However, I could certainly get a map of Lajjun's location (can't believe I never thought of that!). It should be uploaded in a couple days, if not tomorrow. --Al Ameer son (talk) 21:52, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- I'll try to get a picture of the site by going there in the next few days. Tiamuttalk 00:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- That would be fantastic! Thanks so much! --Al Ameer son (talk) 07:59, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- I'll try to get a picture of the site by going there in the next few days. Tiamuttalk 00:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
GA review
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A good readable article.
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Well done.
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- The article could be improved by the addition of more images. I see that Walid Khalidi has a few historical ones in his book. Nevertheless, I'm awarding GA.Pyrotec (talk) 14:08, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail:
- Thanks so much! This just made my day. The ones from Khalidi are from 1987, therefore unfortunately deeming them unqualified for the the BM Palestine/Israel licensing. Tiamut, however, will try to take some pictures of the place in the coming days. Cheers! --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)