Talk:Australian Jews in Israel

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Australian Jews in Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080720101723/http://www.southern-cross-group.org/archives/Statistics/Numbers_of_Australians_Overseas_in_2001_by_Region_Feb_2002.pdf to http://www.southern-cross-group.org/archives/Statistics/Numbers_of_Australians_Overseas_in_2001_by_Region_Feb_2002.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080720101723/http://www.southern-cross-group.org/archives/Statistics/Numbers_of_Australians_Overseas_in_2001_by_Region_Feb_2002.pdf to http://www.southern-cross-group.org/archives/Statistics/Numbers_of_Australians_Overseas_in_2001_by_Region_Feb_2002.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:54, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Australian Jews in Israel/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Theleekycauldron (talk · contribs) 21:03, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   I'd like to see much clearer prose, especially with regards to jargon. Define "olim" once, preferably in the lead, and then use olim for the rest of the article.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   Some sources are just bare URLs. I ran IAbot, but the citations need to be cleaned up.

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   I feel like there's much more to this than the article has, but the article does reasonably well at summarizing.

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

   I think the section on all immigrants, as opposed to Australian emigrants, goes into a lot of detail that isn't really necessary. It should probably link back to a main article about emigration to Israel, and go into some detail about how Australian emigration is different.

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

   I have a problem with the overwhelmingly positive portrayal of Oleh life in Israel, particularly with actions by the Israeli government– I'd like to see more on the bureaucratic process or something that can match for NPOV. I can't imagine that this is the whole story, given that it overwhelmingly relies on source 15. The line about how people who were living comfortable were "revealing" but the people who were poor were "claiming" seems biased. I also think the line about Jews seeing all immigration to Israel as spiritual is misguided, especially given the study the demographics section relies on.

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

   The images depicting immigration to Israel in general and shots of the IDF without pertinence to Australian Jews don't seem too pertinent to me.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Good luck on improving this article! This is definitely a great start, but I think there's a lot of work to do before we get to GA or B-class. I left some notes on how to improve, let me know if someone needs clarification or more suggestions.