Talk:Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Commission
 | The contents of the Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Commission page were merged into Equity and Reconciliation Commission on 1 February 2018 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Excellent summary and a promising start on the rest. You might consider adding a full or partial sentence about the implementaiotn of recommendations. Dwebsterbu (talk) 21:13, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Peer review
[edit]This is a well-written and well-documented article with a balanced coverage. The lead section is short, clear and provides basic information introducing the article.
The sources are numerous, reliable and diverse (governmental, intergovernmental and nongovernmental alike). Their authors show no clear bias or personal prejudice. You even made available primary documents from Morocco itself.
Overall, the content seems neutral, but beware of some words and expressions like “violently quelling”, “only ruled for five years”, “an even heavier hand” or “merely”, which look like value judgements. I think I also found a typo: in the “criticism” part, you wrote “as only those who was subject of enforced” instead of “as only those who were subjects of enforced” ”, but I may be mistaking.
The structure is clear and effective, except maybe for the last two paragraphs (“Criticism” and “Since the Commission Ended”). Consider switching them for logical order, to have the outline of the recommendations described before their implementation, followed by criticism of said implementation. Additionally, the last sentence of the “criticism” part seems to be at odds with the following part. You could also merge the “Findings” and “Recommendations” paragraphs into subsections of a larger part about the commission’s report. The same goes for the last two paragraphs, which could be united into an “after the commission” part.
In conclusion, this article is really effective and thorough. I would only recommend minor adjustments. Xialouf (talk) 22:26, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
comments on full draft
[edit]I concur, this is very good and cover a lot of ground very effectively. I've added some links and done very minor edits. Two relate to NPOV - removed the words "brutal" and "positive" – if you wish these in, you could find a quote or reference to someone else stating this.
You should go ahead and move your article to the Wikipedia mainspace. Tips on doing this appear in the “Moving Out of Your Sandbox” handout, at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Classroom_handout_-_moving_out_of_your_sandbox.pdf
You may also wish to consult, before the final deadline at the end of next week, the handout on “Polishing Your Article” at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Polishing_your_articles.pdf Dwebsterbu (talk) 23:33, 22 March 2016 (UTC)