Talk:Saqib Ali

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Saqib Ali was a good article, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Delisted version: March 22, 2007

Contents

[edit] Argument for notability

While the article is a complete mess the Washington Post is portraying his and Keith Ellison's victories as signs of Muslim Americans growing engagement in the political process and see his election as a historic marker. Therefore the article should be cleaned up instead of deleted.Wowaconia 22:14, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I cleaned up, wiki-fied, and expanded the article. It should be acceptable now.Wowaconia 22:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Very impressive job expanding and adding references to the article Subwayguy 20:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
  5. It is stable.
  6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
    a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
  7. Overall:
    a Pass/Fail: [[Image:|15px]] Diez2 16:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] obviously an inside job

this needs to be something other than an autobiography. WillC 01:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

If you look at the history of this page you'll see that I was one of the main contributors and I became intrested in him when he was mentioned on CNN alongside Keith Ellison (politician) whose election was in my district. As this article was scant and un-wiki when I looked into it I worked to bring it up to wiki-standards. I live in Minnesota not Maryland and while I am not a Muslim I think its intresting to see how Muslim-Americans and non-Muslim Americans are getting along in the post 9/11 world.--Wowaconia 02:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA/R

I must agree with User:WillC, and list this article up for a Good Article review. The introduction appears to give a purely positive outlook on this person and various politically signfigant things, things like "won the right" and excessive use of victory are the first sign there's a problem here. Of course, other people may not see it that way, so i've filed a WP:GA/R on this article, and also because it was not properly listed on the main GA page, and I figured I might as well go and handle the articles which showed up on a list of improperly passed articles anyway. Homestarmy 19:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I have changed the phrasing but it seems arbitrary to take exception with the word "victory" being used to describe winning an election.

--Wowaconia 22:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
I admit, my standards often are arbitrary when it comes to how dramatic certain word choices sound, but that's part of why I put the article up for review instead of just saying that i'll delist it tommorow or something. I probably would of filed the review anyway, i've been dealing with articles that haven't been listed as GA's properly all today anyway, and i've listed several others that seemed somewhat controversial as well, the way I see it, it doesn't hurt to make the status of these articles relatively certain. Homestarmy 22:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Trespass notification.jpg

Image:Trespass notification.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)