Talk:Amir Ahmad Nasr

This article was nominated for deletion on 7 May 2017. The result of the discussion was keep.

Amir Ahmad Nasr was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 11, 2017). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Africa: Sudan

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Sudan.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Amir Ahmad Nasr/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs) 09:46, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this article. Vanamonde (talk) 09:46, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nasr is clearly an important figure, but the article at present does not do its subject justice. It is 532 words long, of which a substantial chunk are quotes from the subject. Much of the coverage is to do with his book and his blog: besides that, the biographical information is limited pretty much to a single paragraph. Likewise, most of the sources are related to his books and his blog, or are primary sources from organizations he is connected with: the only detailed biographical source seems to be the WSJ article, and it's difficult to construct a GA article from a single news profile. Even so I was able to find information in the sources currently in the article, which is not included: such as the fact that he applied for and received asylum in Canada. This really needs more detail to meet GA criterion 3 (broad in coverage) and as the article is currently very far from meeting this, I regret to say I have to fail this review. Vanamonde (talk) 10:30, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback! I understand your reasoning for declining the nomination, and I appreciate constructive criticism. Cheers! Comatmebro (talk) 21:32, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]