Template:Did you know nominations/History of Bahrain (1783–1971)

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by BlueMoonset (talk) 05:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC).

History of Bahrain (1783–1971)

(

)

... that cultivation of palm trees (pictured) was historically one of the backbones of economy of Bahrain?

Reviewed: Media of Bahrain and Indians in Bahrain
Comment: I'm open to alternatives for hook. Note to promoter: Great effort was put into the article; I'd appreciate if it's put into the lead of hooks.

Moved to mainspace by Mohamed CJ (talk), Droodkin (talk). Nominated by Mohamed CJ (talk) at 16:23, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for being a harbinger of bad news, but this nom was submitted on February 10, 2013; two weeks after the article was created on January 30, 2013. Furthermore, the gradual expansion of the stub has been based on extremely close paraphrasing of a single source (copyrighted by the University of Chicago in 1980). Please compare even just one of the endless similar examples. The source says: The pearling season opened in May, when al-barih winds blew from the north, and ended in October. The article says: "The official pearl diving season known as al-ghaws stretched from May to October." The source: Two other seasons took place without official recognition... The Wiki: "Two other unofficial seasons existed as well..." (Feb. 4 by User:Mohamed CJ) and so on, section by section expanded day by day. The article, which is almost 40,000 characters long now, is practically a line-by-line complete retelling of that single source... which is a book over 300 pages long.[1] I'm afraid, someone more experienced with the wp:copyvio investigations should have a closer look at it just to make sure we are all GFDL compliant here. There are other serious issues like the pipes to many relevant articles hiding behind generic words practically impossible to spot among the avalanche of links to other generic words, etc. I don't have time to go into more detail. Besides, this is not the place for it. Sorry, Poeticbent talk 22:29, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Wow, shocking.. but I'm cool :) I also would like someone familiar with copyvio to give us input here as I think you're mistaken. The book tells history of Bahrain, and it's natural that I'd follow it and not jump sections. As for the date, you should check the date the article was moved to mainspace rather than created. I understand you might not be familiar with this situation and it's alright. I don't understand your last point, could you explain further? Mohamed CJ (talk) 22:46, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Mohamed, but I'm going to agree with the close paraphrasing concerns. Compare for example "This prominent position brought the port town the enmity of other ports in the region" with "Zubara's prominence...earned the enmity of other ports in the Gulf", or "they managed to stay in control, playing their enemies against each other" with "they remained in control of the island, playing one enemy against the other", or "Taxes were only imposed on Shia, on the basis that they were not a part of the army" with "They were collected only from the Shia, on the grounds that they did not serve in the military". There are plenty of other examples; this needs a comprehensive cleaning. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:42, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Alright. I've tagged the article, as I currently don't have time to fix this issue. This can be closed. Mohamed CJ (talk) 18:56, 17 February 2013 (UTC)