Talk:Maghrebi script/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cerebellum (talk · contribs) 13:08, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I will be reviewing this article. It may take me a few days. --Cerebellum (talk) 13:08, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Ian, this was a fun article to review! The quality and variety of the illustrations is fantastic, I don't know if I've seen any other article on the Arab world with such good images. It's especially valuable for writing about a script, since just describing the script doesn't get the point across as well as an image. The prose is also very high-quality. The only concerns I have are a few about the content and organization, and the references, all detailed below. I hope I don't come across as too critical of the references, I actually like that you use so many Arabic sources - in some articles I've written using only English sources I feel like I'm just scratching the surface of the topic, using Arabic allows you to write a much more thorough article. I'll place the article on hold for seven days to allow you to respond to my comments. --Cerebellum (talk) 13:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@إيان: I'll have to regretfully fail the article for now as it has been more than seven days, please let me know if you renominate and I hope I can review it again! --Cerebellum (talk) 19:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Content

Lead: I think the lead should be expanded so that it provides a better summary of the article. I recommend adding a paragraph summarizing the history, and one on the variations.
Organization. I recommend moving the section "contrast with Mashreqi scripts" to the beginning of the article, and expanding it to describe the script more extensively. It could include the information from the lead about how the the script has extended horizontal features and final open curves.
Imperial patronage: Aside from the Nasrids, did any other Andalusi dynasties patronize Maghrebi script?
Contrast with Mashreqi scripts: The last sentence here, about the ulama and the printing press, doesn't seem to fit the rest of the section, seems like it should be in history.
Italics: I think the use of italics is a little inconsistent, which is common in articles about the Arab world. MOS:FOREIGNITALIC says that foreign words should be in italics unless they have common use in English, which is a bit vague. I don't care which words you italicize as long as it is consistent, but Mashreq is italicized in some places while Mashreqi is not. The other ones I'm not sure about are Biled as-Sudan (italicized, but al-Andalus isn't), al-Maghreb al-Aqsa (italicized), and mujawher (sometimes italic, sometimes not).

Referencing

I think it is helpful to add English translations of source titles, otherwise the article is not very accessible for non-Arabic speakers. At a minimum, author and publisher names should be in English. I've made the changes for a few of the refs.
Several books are cited without page numbers, are you able to add the page numbers?
Reference #3 surprised me, when I clicked on the link it downloaded an executable file. I did not run the file, is there any way to view this document in the browser?
For reference #6, are all the citations to the same page, 3749? If not you should specify the page number each time you cite the work.
Reference #38 does not support the sentence about Qundusi, it is just a print of his calligraphy. Do you have another source?