Talk:Killing of Shani Louk/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Killing of Shani Louk (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator: Alalch E. (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Irruptive Creditor (talk · contribs) 05:14, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Passed Good Article Nomination

I believe this article has passed its Good article nomination. I reclassified it from the law category and into an appropriate one, culture. Otherwise, I reasonably believe it meets good article criteria. This is how the article, as of March 29, 2024, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Yes

2. Verifiable?: Yes

3. Broad in coverage?: Yes

4. Neutral point of view?: Yes

5. Stable?: Yes

6. Images?: Yes

The basis for my conclusion is as follows:

1. First, the article is fairly well-written and I believe that a reasonable person could understand both the topic and its related topics. From what I read, it states an Israeli-German tattoo artist was believed to have been killed in massacre, multiple sources indicate the massacre was perpetrated by members or affiliates of a group known as Hamas, it had been reported that social media users shared video footage of what is believed to be her final moments, it was unknown for a while as to whether she had actually been killed, later forensic analysis of the scene deduced that the death of this person had likely occurred, the family was devastated, and this person's death pertains to a wider conflict going on between Israel and Palestine.
2. Second, the information is verifiable to a reasonable degree. There are well-reputed sources (as established by current Wikipedia talk on perennial sources). Such sources include Der Spiegel, The New York Times, Washington Post, The Guardian, etcetera. Most of the sources are of either European or American origin. However, references to Indian, Israeli, and Japanese news media also appear. There are a minutia of suspect or unsatisfactory sources like Ynet (never heard of it) and such, yet an insurmountable majority of the referenced sources are fairly reputable.
3. Third, while this article is about a now-deceased person and features a great deal discussion about them, it nonetheless is broad enough to weave in discussion about major questions of international policy and concern. It discusses this woman's death in relation to a regional conflict in the Middle East.
4. Fourth, this article appears to be reasonably stable, I undertook a cursory look and could find no glaringly obvious hallmarks of edit warring or sockpuppetry. No massive flood of reverted edits by multiple editors (however, multiple edits by one user, Got Milked were reversed, but this appears to be a lone case and not indicative edit-warring), no torrent of IP users with similar ranges ricocheting around, etcetera.
5. Fifth, despite the claims of one user, Tallard, on the talk page, I uncovered nothing to substantiate the allegation that this article is "IDF propaganda". For the little it mentions of Israel, the article seems criticize (Israeli) President Isaac Herzog for associating with a tabloid magazine.
6. Sixth, it has images, or rather just one. However, the image is of fair quality and I don't believe this article would benefit from more.

I would like to congratulate all the editors who've contributed to this article.

Irruptive Creditor (talk) 06:32, 30 March 2024 (UTC)