Talk:Michel Aflaq/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Coemgenus (talk · contribs) 15:55, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

    Done In "Arab Ba'ath Movement: 1940–1947", you have two sentences that say the same thing: that in 1942, Aflaq quit teaching to do politics full-time. You should delete one of them.

    Done You translate "Ba'ath" as both "rebirth" and "resurrection". Which is it? Is it both?

   In the last sentence of "Death of Aflaq", you write that "...the Iraqi Governing Council, in pursuance of the de-Ba'athification policy, ordered the removal of his coffin and the destruction of his tomb." Was the order carried out? If so, where is his body now?

• • • I have no freakin' clue! --TIAYN (talk) 16:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

    Done In "Arab Ba'ath Movement: 1940–1947", do you have a citation for the quoted section "the most prestigious secondary school in Syria"?

    Done In "The schism: 1964–1965", do you have a citation for "Shortly after, Umran was sent into exile as Ambassador to Spain." Does the source say that the reason he was sent was to exile him (or at least get him out of the way)?

    Done Same section, do you have a citation for "It was plain from the very beginning that the initiative lay with the anti-Aflaq forces."?

    Done In "Iraqi-led Ba'ath Party: 1968–1989", do you have a citation for his criticism of the Ba'ath leadership's inaction in Palestine?

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

    Done In "The beginning: 1963–1964", the sentence "While the Military Committee was in fact hijacking the Ba'ath Party..." comes off as a bit inflammatory.

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Some discussion, but no edit-warring that I can see.

5. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images are all from Syria and Iraq, and all purport to be public domain.

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   OK, all my questions and comments seem to be resolved, as far as they can be. I'll change this to "pass." Nice job! --Coemgenus (talk) 16:47, 15 February 2012 (UTC)