Jump to content

Talk:The Great Mecca Feast

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
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: promoted by Launchballer talk 22:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

George Krugers
George Krugers
  • Source: Ray, Sandeep (2023). "What Did the Haji Jawa See in Mecca? A Film from 1928 as a Primary Source". Historical Journal of Film, Radio & Television. 43 (4): 1024.
Created by Crisco 1492 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 659 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: QPQ done, well-written article, very interesting hook and image is in the public domain. Looks good to go. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:20, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:The Great Mecca Feast/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 16:28, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Jon698 (talk · contribs) 03:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Crisco 1492:, I'll begin reviewing this article over the next few days. It looks promising from a first glance. Jon698 (talk) 03:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    I did not find any grammatical, spelling, or prose errors within the article. I formatted the works cited section to be divided into book, journal, news, and web.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
    a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
    I checked all of the sources and found that the text accurately reflects what is within them. I added one extra line about him traveling to Jeddah aboard the SS Madioen. I found no plagiarism or copyright violations.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    This article covers the plot, production, reception, and legacy of the film in great detail. This is probably 99% of the information you can learn about this subject due to its obscurity in the English-speaking world.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    The article is neutral and has no biased material in it.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    No edit wars and only a few edits within the past few months.
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    All of the images are either fair use or public domain in the United States.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Good job @Crisco 1492: on improving such an obscure piece of media. Here is another article you have improved to GA status.