Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Siege of Jerusalem (637)

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

Not promoted - no consensus for promotion after being open for 28+ days -MBK₀₀₄ 03:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Jerusalem (637) edit

Nominator(s): الله أكبرMohammad Adil

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because... after having this article peer reviewed twice, and following all the suggestions and advices given by the reviewers i felt confident that it meets the requirements. Regards.... الله أكبرMohammad Adil 20:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are still hyphens instead of ndashes in the number ranges, adn the citations are still inconsistent with respect to spacing or non-spacing YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 23:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

just fixed them, i didnt knew that ndsh was for all numbers, i thought it to be only useful betwn the dates.

Wht did u meant by the citations are still inconsistent with respect to spacing or non-spacing

i didnt get it, plz explain. الله أكبرMohammad Adil 23:55, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In some cases you use p.56 and others p. 56. Also in some cases you use p. for multiple pages and pp. dot for other multiple pages YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 00:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, i just Fixed them. الله أكبرMohammad Adil 12:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
- No problems reported with dab or external links. Image:Al aqsa moschee 2.jpg is missing alt text, please add this forthwith.
- The second paragraph in the prelude section has no references; see what you can do about adding references.
- To the best of your ability see about integrating the links in the see also section into the body of the main text and removing the section from the article. Over the years the people at FAC have grown openly against such sections, so this will save some hassle for you there when you finish here. TomStar81 (Talk) 16:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done...

I have provided references, and hv removed see also section.

I have tried earlier with alt text in info box image and i tried again [1], it isnt working in the info box, or may be there is some thing wrong with my coding.

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 20:54, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I would've left a message about that if I had known it was going to be an issue. For the main infobox captions the alt test goes on the line with the actual image parameters (ie the line with "Image:example.xxx") rather than the caption line. Just add the alt= parameter after the last vertical line and plug the alt text in like that; it'll show up when you save again. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done...

Thanks for help, i hv also added it to damascus and yarmouk's articles.

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 11:19, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support TomStar81 (Talk) 17:05, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The article still needs something of a copyedit, as in many places, pronouns aren't used, so that Jerusalem is often repeated over and over in close proximity. The second thing is that in some places a definite or indefinite article is missing, eg "starting [a] series of campaigns" YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 04:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with YellowMonkey re the grammar/prose issue. I have this on my GA review list, and have posted similar comments there. I did go through the lead and try to set an example. I realize that English may not be the first language of the editor, and in such cases, we need to be helpful, but it still needs to be clear and literate. Mohammad Adil, you've done a nice job explaining this battle. Please work with us to get the prose up to where it should be. Do you have someone who can help you go through this? Auntieruth55 (talk) 19:17, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes thats true English isnt my first language, there was this user User:Wereldburger758 who helped me out in the copy editing of Battle of Yarmouk and Siege of Damascus (634) but he is on indefinite wiki vacations. See if you guys can help.

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 20:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't an effort to pick on you because of your English skills. They are actually quite good, and you should be commended for even trying to write an article in another language. I suggest you find the Guild of Copy Editors and see if one of them can help you. They are top notch copy editors who do all kinds of editing for people who need or want help. In the meantime, and one of the others could advise more on this, perhaps you should withdraw this without prejudice....? I don't know but YellowMonkey would. Auntieruth55 (talk) 20:38, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed some pronoun related problems where jerusalem was repeatedly used, as user yellow monkey pointed out. I have also tried fixing some article related issues putting 'the' and 'a' in various places where they were missing. You can check it here [2]

As i said before that english isnt my native language and the user who helped me out in past in copy editing is now on indefinite leave so kindly you can help me out where ever i stuck.

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 21:09, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested a copy edit at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. الله أكبرMohammad Adil 21:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have passed this article at the Good Article stage, but I do think it needs more work to pass MH ACR. The single sentence on the siege seems brief for an article about the siege. Although I understand that the besiegers didn't want to invest a lot of time investing the city, so to speak, surely Gibbon had more on this event, which apparently lasted several months? I like the aftermath information, the founding of the mosque of the Rock, etc. Auntieruth55 (talk) 21:19, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

no, not even Gibbon had much to say about the siege. In fact the early muslim historian didnt wrote any detailed account of the siege, making it impossible for us to expand the siege section further.

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 13:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.