Wikipedia:Peer review/Muhammad Ali Jinnah/archive2

Muhammad Ali Jinnah

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to nominate it for a featured article.

Thanks, InlandmambaPLU (talk) 13:44, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

 Doing... – Long article, so comments may be posted in chunks, depending how many I have. Runfellow (talk) 17:04, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Alright, thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:20, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Runfellow (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments, Part 1 (Lead and Early years) Lead Seems like Pakistan could be wikilinked in the first sentence, but something tells me you may have some reason as to why you didn't do that. Done "served as leader of the" - Is there a more specific title instead of "leader"? Leader is used because he was the head of the Muslim League. We all call the leader of political parties. I think it would be the best word. "initially advocating Hindu-Muslim unity and helping to shape the 1916 Lucknow Pact between Congress and the Muslim League" - A little bit of awkward syntax here, but not a big deal. Improved.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:02, 22 October 2012 (UTC) "his party gained strength" - Since I don't think you've referred to his political party yet, it might make sense to name it here. Done "The League" - Which one, Muslim or All-India? Might want to clarify here. Done The two wikilinks in this paragraph go to Two-Nation Theory and Lahore Resolution, which is fine, but the text that leads them isn't quite specific enough. Both phrases, "should have their own state" and "supported a separate nation for Muslims" are very similar, and don't imply those specific pages here. We can't really assume the average reader will hover over the page to see the URL before clicking. I wouldn't be afraid of using the actual terms here (the theory and the resolution) and using a little description if necessary. I've kept one in the lede and left the other for the body, and played with the language.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:15, 22 October 2012 (UTC) I think "won most reserved Muslim seats" should be "won most of the seats reserved for Muslims", but I could be wrong. Done Since "predominantly" is an adverb, I don't think there needs to be a hyphen between that and "Hindu". Done Maybe begin the final paragraph with "As" here? No big deal though. Done "Minority rights" here could mean a few different things: ethnic, religious, racial, etc. Did he work for all of these, or were there specific groups he helped? Again, not a big deal. Non-Muslim. I've cut it.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:10, 23 October 2012 (UTC) The "legacy" section here feels a little awkward, but I'll wait until I get to that section before I comment on it here. Early Years Background The note for "a" is a bit of a run-on sentence, but could probably be split easily. You'll also need a citation for a few of those claims, since the information calls into question other information. Fixed.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:54, 23 October 2012 (UTC) Just to give us some context here, you may at least want to include the birth year. I tossed a probable year in there.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:01, 23 October 2012 (UTC) Since naming the parents isn't an interjection, there should be no comma after "Mithibai" Done "His father, Jinnahbhai Poonja" - Since you already named him in the previous sentence, repeating it here isn't necessary. Done Maybe wikilink princely state; I'll admit I didn't know what they were. Done Although colloquially we sometimes say we "belong" to a particular church, I'm not sure that's the right phrase for Wikipedia. Fixed.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:29, 23 October 2012 (UTC) I don't think I follow the phrase "Obtained a matriculation". The link you included seems to be mostly about high school, and I don't see how one can "obtain" matriculation in this case. I could be wrong, though. Bolitho says at page 7, "armed only with his matriculation form the Bombay University, gained at the Mission School". I do not understand the mechanics of this, but I gather that the university oversaw the examination in some manner.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:29, 23 October 2012 (UTC) I don't think the portion beginning with "In his later years" and ending with the end of the "Background" section is really appropriate here. If there is a "folklore" section here or something, it might go there, but the information here is unverifiable and thus shouldn't be included. How someone is perceived is a part of their story. In this case, the boy from the common streets of Karachi went on to become a great man, and had stories told about him. Relating that fact is important, more than the particular story. As we would say in the law, it's not offered for the truth of it.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:29, 22 October 2012 (UTC) Also, the phrase "his biographer" implies that someone functioned as an official biographer of sorts. Stanley Wolpert was listed in the lead, and Hector Bolitho here. Done. Changed it to "A" instead of "His". In England "aspiring barrister joined Lincoln's Inn;" - Should be a comma after rather than a semicolon. Done You'll want to wikilink barrister either here or in the lead at some point. Done "His legal education there" - To avoid pronoun confusion (the previous sentence is really about Wolpert) you might want to switch "his" to "Jinnah's". Could go either way. Done "legal education there" would probably be better as "legal education at the Inns of Court School of Law, since "there" doesn't really give us any indication as to what the wikilink would be about, and may even imply that it would be a separate article about Jinnah's legal education. The source does not mention the name, and so I am reluctant. While that seems to be what went on, it never calls it that.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:05, 23 October 2012 (UTC) Done Comma after "apprenticeship system" Done "centuries, following an established barrister and learning from what he did, as well as learning the law from books." - Awkward syntax, maybe split this into two sentences. Fixed.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:05, 23 October 2012 (UTC) Delete "of learning" Done Maybe wikilink to Classical liberalism? Not sure. Seems fair enough.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:01, 23 October 2012 (UTC) "of Indian extraction" - seems like an awkward way to phrase it. Maybe this is a compromise of some sort from somewhere else? Compromise basically from "Indian".--Wehwalt (talk) 02:50, 23 October 2012 (UTC) "voting majority of three" is also an awkward way to phrase this. Was Parliament still "first past the post" then, and if so, did he have 50% plus three votes, or a plurality plus three votes? It's an idiom in British politics; this article is more or less written in British English, though I tried ot be guided by any phrasings I saw in books written in the subcontinent in my part of the writing. This phrasing properly states that he won by the margin of three votes. I could put a link in there to clarify?--Wehwalt (talk) 23:18, 22 October 2012 (UTC) I don't think "Visitor's Gallery" is capitalized. Done "he was always impeccably dressed in public" - It's a very minor NPOV issue, but it's an NPOV issue all the same. This isn't very quantifiable/verifiable. There seems to be a lot here about fashion, which jumps around quite a bit (from his days as a barrister to his death). Not sure if all of this information is completely necessary. Dress was an important characteristic of how Jinnah wanted to be perceived, and it is a way in which he contrasted with Gandhi. Not every adverb is POV.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:29, 22 October 2012 (UTC) More later. Many of the above comments are just nitpicks, so none of them are really huge issues or anything of the sort. For the most part, the article is very clear and well written. The structure works well so far, and it helps that the subject at hand is very interesting. I'll be back later with further comments. – Runfellow (talk) 18:04, 22 October 2012 (UTC) I have corrected some of the work. Will be correcting the rest soon. Thank you. --Inlandmamba (fruitful thought) 19:03, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Runfellow (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments, Part 2 (Career) Career As barrister "brought him few briefs" - might be a British/American difference here, but it's not a phrase I'm familiar with. This is again a proper Britishism, I believe. Would a link here help?--Wehwalt (talk) 23:29, 22 October 2012 (UTC) Nor is "His first step ahead". Maybe just awkward syntax. Done. Changed it to "His first step towards a brighter career occurred" Maybe wikilink Advocate General. I don't think it's hyphenated. Done When possible and practical, you'll want to use active rather than passive phrases. For example, "This offer was politely declined by Jinnah" could be "Jinnah politely declined the offer". Done "– a huge sum at that time," if you use a dash to set off the interjection, you'll want a concluding dash here too after "time". Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:08, 23 October 2012 (UTC) Not sure about "newborn state". Never heard the phrase "newborn" used in reference to a country before. Changed to "new".--Wehwalt (talk) 03:08, 23 October 2012 (UTC) Delete "particular" in "particular fame" Done "supposedly rigged by a "caucus" of Europeans" - see WP:W2W for "supposedly". If someone alleged that this happened, say who claimed it. Got that.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:23, 23 October 2012 (UTC) "in order to" can be just "to" Done "Before he unsuccessfully" - pronoun confusion, since the previous sentence "he" is about Jinnah, and the "he" here refers to Tilak. Done As rising leader "Discontent in India against British rule erupted in 1857 in revolt." - Awkward syntax, since the discontent didn't really erupt in revolt; rather, the people did. Got that.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:27, 23 October 2012 (UTC) Bear in mind that if you're going to go with a chronological order of events, you're sort of stuck with that to some extent. It seems as though most of the article regards Jinnah's life events, but other parts are about particular subjects, not events. In other words, the "Career" section title seems a little misleading here. It seems like it will be a breakdown of his various professions, and begins as such, but then changes back to a chronological narrative. Done that by altering the section titles.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:21, 23 October 2012 (UTC) "opposed by leader" should be "opposed by leaders" Done Deleting the commas around "headed by Aga Khan" will make the sentence flow a little better. Done "to advocate for communal interests" - Not sure what this phrase means, like if they were advocating for their interests, or the interests of Muslims, or of Muslims and Hindus, etc. Fixed.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:03, 23 October 2012 (UTC) The sentence beginning with "Throughout his legal career" seems like it regards a completely different subject than the previous few sentences. Maybe a new paragraph, or move it somewhere? "This followed the following year," & "stressed in joining that joining" - ??? Comma after "In April 1913" Done Has Ghokle been introduced by the time Jinnah went to England with him? Maybe I missed that. Nice catch. He's not worth the mention, deleted.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:31, 23 October 2012 (UTC) Break from Congress "Although the Pact" - here "pact" would not be capitalized. Done "although, with the war, Britain's politicians were not interested in considering Indian constitutional reform." There's a very similar sentence in the section above, so you might want to find a way to delete one of them or rephrase it in some way. "fashionable young daughter" - how do you define and/or verify "fashionable" here? A modern type of girl. As in those days, normally girls used to be more simple as compared to now. "personal friend" - delete "personal" Done Comma after "from Rattanbai's family" Done "in 1929, thereafter" - Normally I'd say use a semicolon here instead of a comma, but since there are already quite a few of those in the article, I'd say just split the sentence with a period. Done "in the wake of World War I, a cause which Gandhi supported" - ???, I don't think this is what you mean (rather, I think you meant that he supported the leadership of the caliphate), but this doesn't quite work. Don't be afraid to break sentences up to create a clearer meaning. Done "did not even bother to attend" to "did not attend" Done More later – Runfellow (talk) 19:25, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Resolved comments from Runfellow (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments, Part 3 (Fourteen Points and Return to Politics) Fourteen Points "and the campaign of resistance proved less effective than hoped, as India's institutions continued to function" - Not quite sure on this one. The conjunctions here imply that the campaign of resistance did not work because India's institutions continued to function. Was the intent to cause instability? The phrase "He showed considerable skill as a parliamentarian" seems like an NPOV issue. If there were people (such as fellow members or the press or other leaders) who said this, you can say something to the effect of "Other members considered Jinnah a skilled parliamentarian". Done Comma after "began two years early" Done "The resulting commission, led by Liberal MP John Simon, though with a majority of Conservatives, arrived in India in March 1928, to be met with a boycott by India's leaders, Muslim and Hindu alike, angered at the British refusal to include their representatives on the commission." - very awkward syntax here. Maybe something like this: The resulting commission, led by Liberal MP John Simon though comprised of a majority of Conservatives, arrived in India in March 1928. India's leaders, both Hindu and Muslim, were angered by the British Government's refusal to include their representatives on the commission." Done "repudiating" should be "repudiate" here, hard to explain that though. Done "meeting in December 1927 and January 1928" - I assume this is one meeting that was conducted over the course of both months, correct? If so, you'll want a comma after "1928". Yes it is the one. Corrected it. Done "Birkenhead in 1928" to "In 1928, Birkenhead" Done "based on geography on the ground that being dependent on each other for election would bind the communities closer together" - Having a very hard time following this one. "defeated at the 1929 British parliamentary election" - You've got two wikilinks to the 1929 UK election in the same section here. I'd recommend getting rid of the first one in parentheses and keeping this one. Done "most of the period 1930 through 1934" I think should be "most of the period between 1930 and 1934". Not sure though. Changed it. A bit of a subtle tweak, here: Since Wolpert wrote his biography in 1984 and Bolitho in 1954, it seems almost anachronistic to list Wolpert's assertion first and then say that Bolitho "denied" that assertion. Switching these two ideas around might make this flow a little better. Singh's i fine where it is. The difficulty there is the parliamentary seat matter. Putting Bolitho first would make things awkward as well, because you have to deny the parliamentary seat you haven't asserted yet.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:38, 23 October 2012 (UTC) "estranged from his daughter, Dina Jinnah," - Since you have already named the daughter in the previous sentence, I don't think you need it here. Also, you've already wikilinked it in an earlier section. Changed it. Removed the name from this sentence. "to marry Christian businessman, Neville Wadia, and when he urged her to marry a Muslim, she" to "to marry Christian businessman Neville Wadia. When he urged her to marry a Muslim, she" Done "to Pakistan in his lifetime, but only for his funeral." to "to Pakistan until she attended his funeral in 1948" Done Return to politics You can probably delete "as those it claimed to represent fragmented politically" since it feels tacked on to the end of the sentence. Changed The first sentence in the note for "b" can probably be reordered a bit to read more like "Jinnah was permanent president of the League from 1919 to 1930, when the position was abolished." Done Comma after "At Jinnah's request". No comma after "Muslim politicians". Done "wrapping up" might be clearer if it was just "closing" Done "the centre" - Is this referring to the new weaker central government? The central government in India, generally. Both under the Viceroy and in the post-independence government. The sources use the term in this way repeatedly, I don't see avoiding it.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:52, 23 October 2012 (UTC) "members of that faith held a majority" - meaning Muslims? Yes. "formed part of the government only in Bengal" - remember that the placement of "only" here is important. The way it is phrased now implies that Bengal was the only province in which they were even able to become part of the new government. I think what is meant is "formed only part of the government in Bengal", which implies that they expected to earn a majority in that province, but were unable. Done "tremendous, almost a traumatic" - are you sure Singh had an "a" there? It seems so, I've returned that book to the library but Google books has identical phrasings for other sources, when discussing this event.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:59, 23 October 2012 (UTC) The Singh quote beginning with "when the Congress" can probably be a block quote of some kind. You can use plain <blockquote></blockquote> or a template. Done "the following two years" - I'd replace "following" with "next", but that's just me. Done "a Working Committee which he appointed" - If it's "the" Working Committee, it's capitalized, but "a" working committee wouldn't be. Also, comma after "committee". The committee was made by Jinnah, I think that using "a" is correct More later. Sorry for being so nitpicky and taking so much space; I'm not trying to be a jerk, I swear. Just trying to help. Runfellow (talk) 21:08, 22 October 2012 (UTC) – As long as it is fruitful, I don't mind. It's better that we can see what kind of mistakes we have done and in future we should refrain from repeating them. Thank you for taking so much time and checking everything in great detail. --Inlandmamba (fruitful thought) 21:18, 22 October 2012 (UTC) I think we've changed or commented on everything.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:43, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments, Part 4 (World War II; Lahore Resolution and Postwar)

• I don't think MOS:HEAD says anything specific about semicolons in section titles, but it does look a bit unorthodox.

I've done it a few times, never had a problem. See William Jennings Bryan presidential campaign, 1896#Economic depression; rise of free silver.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:22, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• It seems like the "main article" in a section about the Lahore Resolution should be Lahore Resolution.
• "1937 vote" should be "1937 election"

Later in the paragraph the term "1937 elections" is used, so I don't want to use it twice.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:57, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• "and that his League, and through it himself," - awkward syntax. Maybe instead of "and through it himself" put something at the end of the sentence, something to the effect of "effectively making him the voice of the Muslim community in India."

• Done

• Comma after "in subsequent years"

• Done

• "consulting with Indian politicians" - "consulting Indian political leaders" would probably work better.

• Changed

• Similar, but somewhat different with "After consulting with Jinnah and with Gandhi". If he consulted the two men, it implies that they somehow consented to the suspension of self-government talks. Was this the case? If not, "negotiated with" might be more appropriate. Or perhaps adding a "despite" in there somewhere.

Changed to "meeting".--Wehwalt (talk) 21:50, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• "co-operating" I think should be "cooperating", but there could be a specific definition for the hyphenated term I'm unaware of.
• The quote beginning with "Independent dominions" here would not be capitalized, as per MOS:QUOTE under "Allowable typographical changes"

• Changed

• I'm curious about the sentence beginning with "No future settlements". Does this mean that the British would basically "back down" out of the region if there was a popular decree that they would do so? Did they describe how this mandate would voice itself (election, etc.)? Just curious.

Things weren't laid out in that detail. It was never the British intent to leave, when they did, to the extent that they did, and leave a power vacuum in their wake a la Mandatory Palestine.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:21, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• Did Cripps use the phrase "local option" specifically?

It's not in his proposals, which are on the web. It's possible it's just how it came to be characterized. Some sources include the phrase in quotes, some do not.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:36, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• "The British quickly arrested most major Congress leaders, to be imprisoned for the remainder of the war." might work better as "The British quickly arrested most major Congress leaders and imprisoned them for the remainder of the war." It might also be a good idea to specify which British group actually did the arresting. Was it the military, bureaucrats, or did the British simply order local authorities to do it? Not a big deal though.

I'll make that change. Probably the military, although those were generally mostly Indian but with British officers. I think it's overdetail in an article of this length.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:29, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• Corrected

• "one of the Aga Khan's palaces" - Don't think "the" should be there.

• Corrected

• No comma after "Pakistan demand,"

• Corrected

• "provincial level—the Punjabi" - elsewhere in the article, you've used a semicolon for phrasing like this, so an en dash seems out of place here. Personally, I'd use something to connect the two parts so that their relation is clear: "to increase the League's political control at the provincial level, since the Punjabi and Bengali Muslim parties foresaw" or something to that effect.

• Changed it.

• "conciliate" - Interesting word, had never read it before. "plebiscites" - another new one. <--That's just for my own notes, not really part of the review.-->

Did most the of minor changes. Will discuss the major ones before changing them.
--Inlandmamba _{(fruitful thought)} 18:36, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Postwar

• "Linlithgow had been succeeded..." might sound better as active rather than passive: "Field Marshal the Viscount Wavell succeeded Linlithgow..."

• Changed to active.

• Since the image here is wide (almost a double image, you could say), I think you could probably make it wider than you have right now. It's a cool image anyway, so I say "why not?"

• Changed the size for 350px to 450px.

• I'm guessing "returned" is another British political idiom? Not suggesting any changes, since it's meaning is obvious, just want to make sure.

Yes.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:42, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• "fight the elections" implies that they were opposed to the elections themselves. Perhaps "campaign on a single issue: Pakistan" might work better.

• Done.

• "The group, which included Cabinet ministers Cripps and Pethick-Lawrence, was the highest-level delegation to try to break the deadlock, and arrived in New Delhi in late March." - Awkward syntax here, since "the group"'s first verb is "included" and second is "arrived", which just sounds a bit odd. Dividing this into two sentences would probably solve this.

I've done that.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:04, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Not sure if "groups" needs to be in quotes here. Even if that was the word they used, it's pretty generic.
• no comma after "members of the interim government"

• Changed.

• Might be a British-American difference here, but "major groupings" I think should be "major groups". "Grouping" is generally reserved for things like darts, so far as I know.

• Changed it to Groups.

• The paragraph beginning with "Congress soon joined" is perhaps the hardest part of the article to follow. That's mostly because negotiations like these are obviously hard to describe without getting overly detailed, but there are a number of places here where the sentences simply feel awkward. It's a noble deed to try to be concise, but sometimes that forces us to try to keep sentences going for longer than they should. Don't be afraid to make it a little longer if you need to split a few sentences to make it all clearer.

Rephrased.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• "severe communal rioting" - Probably just "rioting" will work, since most rioting is severe and communal.

• Changed.

• Sentence beginning with "Following the failure" will have to be split up somehow. Five commas seems a tad excessive.

I have also gone back and put previous comments in collapsed boxes using Template:Resolved comments so that the page doesn't get out of hand. – Runfellow (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Great. Thank you.
--Inlandmamba _{(fruitful thought)} 18:48, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments, Part 5 (Mountbatten and partition and Governor-General)

Mountbatten and partition

• The quote about getting in "Jinnah's mind" is a good one, but I'd like to know who specifically said it. Was this from Congress, British diplomats, or did Jalal use the phrase in his book?

It was in Mountbatten's briefing papers, so no doubt very high level British Indian Civil Service types. I'll clarify.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:13, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• "favourably impressed" seems redundant, since one is rarely "unfavourably impressed"

I think "not impressed" would be ambiguous as to whether Mountbatten disliked Jinnah or thought him a lightweight.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:29, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Moving some things around in the fourth paragraph might help things come off a bit more chronological:
  • Placing a period immediately after "Viceroy to Indian leaders"
  • Then the explanation of the plan, which begins with "On 15 August" and ends with "eastern Bengal".
  • Then the day after the plan was introduced, "Mountbatten, Nehru, Jinnah and Sikh leader Baldev Singh made the formal announcement" etc.
  • Then the sentence beginning with "In the weeks which followed"

Done that. Nice effect.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Not sure what N.W.F.P. stands for, but unless it has a special reason why it would include full stops, it should probably be NWFP if you want to use the acronym, as per MOS:ABBR

• N.W.F.P used to be the name of a province. It has been changed to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. I have wikilinked it.

North-West Frontier Province. I have never seen it rendered without full stops, and the province is mentioned earlier. I'll toss a (N.W.F.P.) next to the first invocation and remove Inlandmamba's pipe.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:36, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• "and as the plane taxied, was heard to murmur, 'That's the end of that.'" - I have to admit that I read this at first as though the plane murmured, not Jinneh.

• Okay. I'll discuss this with other editors and then change it. It's Jinnah, not Jinneh :)

changed to clarify.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Pakistan's independence is obviously the biggest event in the article. As such, it seems like a more appropriate title for this section might include "Independence" in some way, rather than just Mountbatten and Partition"

• Will discuss this also.

--Inlandmamba _{(fruitful thought)} 19:08, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Did that.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Governor-General

• This is something you'll have to figure out for the rest of the article too, but according to WP:JOBTITLES, titles of people (like governor-general) are not capitalized. Or in the case of this section title, I believe it would be "Governor-general". In the previous section, "governor-general" isn't capitalized. But in the lead and next sections, it is. I think you can probably get away with capitalizing it everywhere if you're consistent, but you'll want to take a look at that kind of stuff and decide which way you want to go.

I think the section header should not be taken to be a rule. Governor-general, would, to be blunt, look funny.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• "disliking to spoil" might be better as "not wanting to spoil"

• Changed.

• Since the Radcliffe Line had such a strong impact, I think it would be a good idea to give some kind of context as to what it was besides wikilinking it. Something to the effect of "Publication of the Radcliffe Line between India and the new nation of Pakistan sparked..."

Fixed.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:04, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• "Few of the members of the" could be "Few members of the" to avoid redundancy.

• Changed.

• "Much of the market for Pakistan's commodities would now be off limits to it" - awkward syntax

Rephrased.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:10, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• in the serial beginning with "to save abandoned crops," you can delete the "to" before "establish security" and "provide basic services"

• Changed.

• "powerful political" might work better as "politically powerful"

• Done.

• Since "The Army" wikilinks to the Pakistani Army anyway, it seems like it would be a good idea to say "The Pakistani Army" in the text.

• Changed.

• The last three paragraphs of this section, which obviously regard a controversial subject are shorter than the others in this article, which lead me to believe (if what I've seen on other articles is any indication) that some of this information may be either a) disputed or b) compromise text. I won't really get into that here, but know that that's the feeling it gives me.

No, one of the paragraphs got chopped in two somehow. I've fixed it. They are short, but I was getting worried about length and I felt there wasn't much more that needed to be said. I felt these needed to be touched on, but there was no point in dwelling on them.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:04, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Since the previous paragraph mentions Rajmohan Gandhi and this one obviously refers to Mohandas Gandhi, you'll probably want to add the first name in there somewhere to avoid any potential confusion.

I tweaked it, but I think we'll have to rely on context. I don't want to use Gandhi's first name because the same space could fit "Mahatma" and I don't wan to use Mahatma for the sensibility of the reader.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:04, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Comma after "300,000"

• Changed.

• "This policy would be strongly opposed by the Bengali-speaking people of East Pakistan, and in 1971 be a factor in their breaking away from Pakistan to form Bangladesh." - Akward syntax, consider changing to something like "The Bengali-speaking people of East Pakistan strongly opposed this policy, and in 1971 the official language issue was a factor in the region's secession to form Bangladesh."

• Done.

Runfellow (talk) 17:33, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments, Part 6 (Illness and death, Aftermath, Legacy, and general comments)

Illness and death

• Since Quaid-e-Azam is italicized elsewhere, you'll want to be consistent and do it here too.

Done. I'll make a point of looking for other places where it is not. There are spelling variations in quotes.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• "the past 30 years" should be "the last 30 years of his life", unless it was a different period.

Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Comma after "advice of doctors"

Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• "(he then weighed just over 36 kilograms (79 lb))" - Since you're using Template:Convert, you can add "disp=sqbr" to create square brackets to go inside your parentheses, or rephrase the sentence to avoid the original parentheses.

Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Like the one mentioned above, the fourth paragraph here is one of the more awkwardly-phrased of the article. As a whole, it feels more like a personal anecdote, which isn't really the tone of the rest of the article. Issues include:
  • Lots of awkward syntax, such as "It being deemed better", "to be met by Jinnah's limousine and an ambulance, into which Jinnah's stretcher was placed", "unsuitable for transporting the dying man and with their occupants not knowing of Jinnah's presence"

It is an uncomfortable story, but one that must be told as it happened on the day of his death. It also speaks to the imperfect nature of Jinnah's creation.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:03, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• • Some added phrases that seem out of place, like "oppressive heat", "promptly broke down", or "At last,"

I'll drop the promptly and at last. I'll defend the "oppressive heat". Wolpert quotes at considerable length accounts of those with Jinnah. It is a pretty horrifying story, if you ask me. It doesn't suit the narrative of Jinnah dying, but it happened and we can't leave it out. There was a refugee camp nearby the breakdown too.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:03, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• "cancelled an official reception that day in honour of Jinnah" - I think this means he cancelled a reception out of respect for Jinnah, but it actually makes it sound as if he cancelled a reception which would have honored Jinnah.

Fixed.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:03, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Arbitrary break for editing purposes

Aftermath

• No comma after "after independence"

Fixed.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:14, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• The sentence about Nusli Wadia might be more appropriate for the Legacy section

Deleted instead. He is not really a part of Jinnah's story.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:12, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• The reference for the accusation of rigging the election against Fatima Jinnah comes straight from her official website, so I don't think that's going to work. Not saying it didn't happen, but you'll want another source for that.

Deleted, not relevant to MAJ's story.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:14, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Comma after "Government of India". No comma after "a consulate in the city".

• Done

• There are two more wikilinks to Dina Wadia here, and two more for Fatima Jinnah.

• Fixed it.

• "part of argument" missing a "the"

• Added "the"

Legacy

• The first sentence is a powerful statement and I've got no problem with it, but you know someone will at some point, so have something ready for when they say something.

Yeah. I know.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:36, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• "Tehran, city's Mohammad Ali Jenah Expressway" - Missing a "the"?

• Done

• "most imposing buildings" - Doesn't seem verifiable, especially with an encyclopedia as a source. The building definitely merits a mention, but just not sure this is the way to do it.

• Done. Changed it to "ponderous".

• "There is a "Jinnah Tower" in Guntur..." - Probably better as The Jinnah Tower in Guntur..." and then delete the "which"

• Changed

• The third paragraph here is just a collection of quotes. They could probably benefit from some kind of introductory sentence. For example, "Jinnah's biographers emphasize his..." etc.

Yes, but the quotes form a narrative. An introductory sentence would dilute the impact of the first quote. I tried several, none were effective.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Comma after "according to Akbar S. Ahmed"

• Done

• "he drank alcohol" - I was a little surprised to read this at the very end of the article. If it merits mention here, and other details are mentioned in the previous sections, it seems like it would merit a mention there as well.

I've moved that.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Probably wikilink hagiography

Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• "It is asserted" - by whom?

Clarified.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:29, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• "Lal Krishna Advani—" comma instead of dash.

• Done

• "profound affect that Jinnah had" - effect

• Done

• Assuming the last line is a direct quote, it needs to be either a) in quotes or b) in a blockquote template.

A quote template is equivalent to a blockquote and is actually preferable. I am not a technical guru (if that's an appropriate word for this article) but am assured by those who are that this is so.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Other notes

• The last image, on my very wide monitor, actually goes down into the Notes section, displacing them somewhat awkwardly. Using a {{clear}} at the end of the main body should solve that problem.

Fine.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Image alt tags are awkward to write, but they're good for accessibility. FA reviewers will probably look for them.

I don't do alt text, but have no objection to having them added. It is not a FA requirement. No matter what I do, someone always picks at the descriptions, so I'd rather not do it.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:03, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• Considering the will is mentioned in the Aftermath section and the tomb mentioned in the Legacy section, it seems like those would be more appropriate locations for those images.

Fair enough. Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• The Further reading section seems mislabled. As per Wikipedia:Further reading, "Further reading should not normally duplicate the entries in the See also or External links sections, or any existing alphabetized list of references in the article, such as is commonly used in conjunction with shortened footnotes." That's not a big deal, since you can just rename it to something else, such as retitling Notes to something else, change References to Notes, and rename the Further reading section as References.

I don't pay as much attention to that part of the article, but should. I've changed a name.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• I don't think external links are typically written out with citation templates, but I doubt that'll be an issue.
• Doesn't seem like the Symbols of Pakistan template should be here, since he's not listed in the box, but I see that a limited few other pages also use it. You may want to check this out.

I didn't put it there, but given the reverence with which he is regarded in Pakistan, I think it would be best to leave it.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

• There are a ton of semicolons in this article. There's no rule against that, but 43 seems a tad excessive.

Curses. You have found one of my writing quirks. I'll try to bring it down by a few.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:32, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Positive notes

I know it can seem like I'm nitpicking quite a bit here and that I'm just tearing things apart, so here are a few positive notes:

• The structure, especially after the name change of the "As barrister" section, is clearly defined and makes sense. It's easy to read all the way through, and I would imagine it's easy to simply find a particular event or section.
• As the article mentions, I'm sure Jinnah is a controversial figure in some circles, but with a few very minor exceptions, I don't see any NPOV issues, which is remarkable for an article like this one.
• There's no doubt that a lot of work has been put into this article, and with a few more minor changes, it will get to FA status relatively quickly. We all know those folks are pretty picky, but this is extremely comprehensive without getting into nitty-gritty detail or being sidetracked by the issues surrounding Jinnah's life. A good read on a worthy topic.

And now for a break. – Runfellow (talk) 19:15, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Very nicely done. Thank you. I will work through the ones Inlandmamba has left for me over the next day.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:32, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the help.
--Inlandmamba _{(fruitful thought)} 19:45, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

I think the two of us have caught everything. I will read it over either tonight or tomorrow to make sure the text is smooth. You've done quite a job there, Runfellow! Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:32, 24 October 2012 (UTC)