Talk:Saruq Al Hadid

Saruq Al Hadid was nominated as a History good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (June 30, 2019). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

United Arab Emirates: Dubai High‑importance

	United Arab Emirates portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Arab Emirates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Arab Emirates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United Arab EmiratesWikipedia:WikiProject United Arab EmiratesTemplate:WikiProject United Arab EmiratesUnited Arab Emirates articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Dubai.

Archaeology High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Saruq Al Hadid/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 10:44, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for letting you wait for so long! However, I think that this article does not yet meet Good Article criteria. Specifically:

Criterium 1 (well written) is not fully fulfilled because
- the lead section is not an adequate summary (does not even mention the age of the site);
- contains inappropriate content (e.g., "Entrance costs 20 AED for adults and 10 AED for children. The museum is open Saturday & Thursday: 08:00am – 02:00pm and Sunday to Wednesday: 08:00am – 08:00pm." – please remove this).
Criterium 2 (varifiable) is not fulfilled as many sentences lack inline citations.
Criterium 3 (Broad in its coverage) is not fulfilled as most highly relevant academic works that show up when doing a Google Scholar search are not included. Although the article has 14 references, most of these are dublicates (and should be listed only once).
Criterium 4 and 5: probably all right.

This still requires a lot of work. However, if you would like to work on fixing these issues soon, please let me know: I would be glad to do a second review after you are done. If I don't hear from you I have to archive/fail this soon (but even in this case, I encourage you to submit it to GAN again when ready, and I may pick it up once again for review). --Jens Lallensack (talk) 10:44, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment: This candidate is quick-failed given the problems outlined above, and lack of author response. I can offer to pick it up again for review when above points were addressed and the article was renominated. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:58, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Logo expo 2020.gif

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:38, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]