Talk:Robin Raphel/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Yash! (talk · contribs) 14:26, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I will start soon. Thanks, — Yash! ^(Y) 14:26, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Yash!: I'll be around to address any concerns, thank you! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:04, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies FreeRangeFrog for this delay. Exams never seem to end in medical school! I will complete the review by tonight. Thank you for your patience, — Yash! ^(Y) 00:07, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Keep it "Clinton" only the second time you mention him.
No need to mention what the post was about since you already do that in the prose. It goes off topic
Was it reported specifically by The Washington Post? If it was just another news story with no specific involvement of TWP, it is better to remove the name of the news source.
Use "Inaugural holder" instead of "Newly Created Position"
Unlink Bill Clinton from the second mention in the infobox.
Use B.A. and M.A. instead of BA and MA
"2 daughters" -> "two daughters"

Done

Early life and education

Flow of text is a bit of concern.
Use full name of Vera since you add who Donald used to be later.
Unlink aluminum.
Remove "thereafter" and use the year she graduated.
Raphel is used successively in last two sentence s. Use 'She' once.
Link "Tehran"

Comment: Hopefully wording is better. Couldn't find mother's maiden name or graduation date, wording adjusted. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:04, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Early diplomatic career

No caps in "Master's".
Is there an year of her joining USAID? If there is, use it in place of " then"
"Link Islamabad.
Link Pretoria.

Comment: I couldn't source the year she joined USAID so I adjusted wording. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assistant Secretary of State

"President Clinton" -> "President Bill Clinton"
"At that time" - be more clear.
"opting instead " -> "opting"
"would focus " -> "focused"
Link Taliban when it is first used.
"had not yet" -> "had not"
If the status of Pakistan is mentioned, do mention India's since the follow-up sentence talks about tension between the two nations.
Try to mention that Bhutto and Sharif were Prime Minister.

Comment: India status ~~pending~~ done. Bhutto and Sharif are mentioned later in the paragraph. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Everything else

Done

Reconciliation efforts in Kashmir

Shouldn't "tension" be a better term to jse instead of "nuclear tension" since there were various events other than the nuclear issue going on? Do point if I am missing something.
One of the two? What was the other one?
"in order to" -> "to"
"eventually lead" -> "lead"

Done

Engaging and cooperating with the Taliban

Merge the first two sentences.
Don't use "openly".
"went so far as to comment" -> "commented" or something else that you would like.
"Al-Qaeda" -> "al-Qaeda"

Done

Rapprochement with Pakistan

Remove "all time low" and use something more formal and simple.
Position of Bush?
Use some another term instead of "sophisticated".
"orchestrating" is a bit repetitive. If possible use an alternative.
In place of "again that year", use the month and rephrase is (add the month with April).
"working together" -> "working"
Remove " as the law became known" and merge the sentence with the next one.

Comment: Apparently the source did not support the second visit so I adjusted. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Not sure about merging the sentence with the next one... do you mean the next section? That's one unbroken paragraph. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done Everything else done.

Impact in India

No caps in "Military".
What do you mean by on record and off record?

Comment: That seems like a bit of OR, I will reword. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done

Ambassador to Tunisia

"Raphel was ambassador at a time when Undersecretary" -> "When Raphel was ambassador, Undersecretary"
"Abidine administration of had reserved" -> "Abidine administration had reserved"
I am confused here. If it was Abidine administration in power, how did they get 20 percent in opposition? Did the opposing party secure that? Or was it something else? Clarify please.
Use "She" in the last line.

Comment: Abidine "reserved" 20% of all seats for the opposition, therefore giving them an ensured minimum of 20% representation in parliament regardless of voting results. Kinda like a subsidy §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:35, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfPak diplomacy

Link AfPak.
"how to allocate " -> "to allocate"
Please mention who was Afnan Khan.
Unlink "law enforcement" and "literacy".
Either use " U.S." or "US" throughout.

Comment: The "US" is in a quote, the rest of the article uses "U.S." §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:38, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done

Post-retirement and return to State Department

Like I said in the 'Lead', if there is nothing special about the news source that reports the story, do not mention the source. So remove TWP and BI. News sources can be mentioned, for example, TMZ released the racial comments of Donald Sterling while TWP and others simply published the story. So TMZ can be mentioned, not TWP. I hope you get my point.

Done You're absolutely right, as in the lead as well. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:03, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

Ref#3 needs accessdate and work.
Ref#4 needs accessdate.
Ref#5 needs accessdate and work.
Ref#28 needs accessdate.
Ref#29 it should be Daily Times.
Ref#32 needs accessdate.
Use "Inaugural holder" in place of "New Creation".

Done

Discussion

And that should do it. — Yash! ^(Y) 06:00, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Yash!: Alrighty, almost all done. Just a couple of questions: 1) I'm unclear where you recommend merging sentences, maybe I'm spacing out on that. 2) See wording on Early life and education section, let me know if OK. 3) IN AfPak diplomacy is it OK to just leave the "US" as is since it's a quote? Everything else is fixed! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:31, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Everything looks fine. I will go through it one more time today. — Yash! ^(Y) 04:48, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great work FreeRangeFrog, it is now a GA! — Yash! ^(Y) 12:28, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Yash!: Weee! Thank you so much for all the review work, I appreciate it! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:37, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]