Talk:26 December 2024 Israeli attack on Yemen/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: M Waleed (talk · contribs) 15:17, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 15:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look at this. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

I will do some copy editing as I go. If you disagree with or don't understand anything, could we discuss it here? Thanks.

Why does the still in the infobox have source information, but the video clip from which it was taken not?

Not addressed.

"sent out a series of strikes" isn't grammatical. How about a first sentence of 'On 26 December 2024, the Israeli Air Force struck targets in areas of Yemen controlled by the Houthi Movement, most notably the Yemeni capital's Sanaa International Airport.'?

Lead: "an Israeli Air Force aircraft struck multiple targets"; article: "were carried out by 25 Israeli Air Force warplanes". The lead now refers to a single aircraft, the article to 25.

"sent out a series of strikes". Is it known if the strikes were by aircraft, missiles or drones (or some combination)? If it is, it would be helpful to say.

"Israeli airstrikes in Yemen in December 2024". You have already told the reader what year it is, no need to repeat it.

"the Houthi Movement in Yemen". Link the Houthi Movement and Yemen; it is usual to link at first mention in the lead and in the main article.

Not addressed.

"According to the Saudi state-owned Al Arabiya news channel, it targeted Sanaa International Airport". I assume that the 25 aircraft did the targeting? In which case "it" should be 'they'.

"with claims that some targets were civilian." Claims by whom?

Not addressed.

"took out" is not very encyclopedic. Perhaps 'destroyed' or 'badly damaged'?

Not addressed.

"as well as three strikes on the port of Hodeidah and the Haziz and Ras Qantib power stations." Is that three strikes on each, or one on each for a total of three?

Not addressed.

"and another person was killed at Ras Issa port." You haven't mentioned an attack on Ras Issa port.

"the Yemeni Air Force-SPC" is a mouthful, is this one entity?

Not addressed.

"captured during the Yemeni civil war". Who were they captured from and who by? Were they military aircraft? If so, say so.

Not addressed.

"three of these aircraft were reportedly destroyed." Who reported this?

"Al-Dailami Air Base was also reportedly struck." When you write "reportedly" you need to either state who reported it, or delete "reportedly" and state the thing as a fact.

"Naval tugs". Why the upper-case N? And in the infobox.

Not addressed.

"The death toll later rose to six, with an additional 40 being wounded." See MOS:NUMNOTES, "Comparable values near one another should be all spelled out or all in figures, even if one of the numbers would normally be written differently".

"the Houthi Movement launched a ballistic missile at Tel Aviv, causing sirens to sound across central Israel." What happened to the missile?

Suggest you reverse the order of the two paragraphs in "Responses" and run them together.

Infobox: "Ras Iffa Port"; main article: "Ras Iffa port". Be consistent.

I have fixed this. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:37, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spot checks

8: "Houthi Movement owned media outlet Al-Masirah reported that at least four people were killed, and 16 others injured in the attacks". The source given states 3 killed and 14 injured.

Not addressed.

13: " Several aircraft of the Yemeni Air Force-SPC captured during the Yemeni civil war were also amongst the targets". The source given states that the aircraft are fighter jets, but makes no mention of the Yemeni Air Force, the SPC , or of them having been captured.

Not addressed.

The first paragraph of the "Strikes" section is completely uncited.

Not addressed.

Gog the Mild (talk) 19:09, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I object to this article getting GA status due to how recent the topic is. This article could significantly change within the next few weeks with more indepth reporting, political fallout occuring, and its legacy on the ongoing conflict. This article would hardly count as being stable. GGOTCC (talk) 03:47, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a bombing which is happened 2 weeks ago. I dont think anything about this specific bombing is going to change anytime soon (or later). You are probably confused with December 2024 Israeli airstrikes in Yemen Abo Yemen ✉ 07:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GGOTCC, it seems fine to me. If the principle you are suggesting were broadly applied then Wikipedia would never have a biography of a living person. The "Wiki" part is there because we can respond rapidly to new information. And WP:GAR is there for GAs which don't. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild, hope you're doing fine, I've looked into the problems pointed out by you and have done my best to fix them, if there's anything that's missing or that I have forgot to fix please let me know Waleed (talk) 18:09, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi M Waleed. Most of the points I raised in my initial run through have not been addressed. I have indicated above where you still need to respond. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:47, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild, two of the three concerns have been addressed, as for the SPC fighter aircraft, the SPC is the "government" of the Houthi forces and any aircraft under the Houthi operation are automatically under the operation of SPC air force Waleed (talk) 11:51, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

for context there are two different governments in Yemen and both have the same govt institutions with the exact same names so we have to differentiate between them somehow Abo Yemen ✉ 11:54, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have listed 11 items as "not addressed" could you tell me which you have addressed and how, preferably immediately below the relevant "Not addressed". If appropriate a simple "Done" will suffice. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild, I've done all those listed except three, the first one about the infobox image which I couldn't figure out hence leaving it to @Abo Yemen, the second being the SPC part which doesn't need to be changed as it's WP:Accurate and the third is the "took out" one which I agree with you is not encyclopedic but couldn't find where the term was present in the article Waleed (talk) 17:23, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done Abo Yemen ✉ 17:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More spot checks

8: I can't see the "Sanaa International Airport which took out the airport's control tower" mentioned as a target. (Try source 5.)
15: checks.
5: almost none of the "Background" section is covered by this.
6: much of the information in the paragraph cite 6 claims to cover does not seem to be there. Eg, I can't find mention of the number of aircraft (to support "were carried out by 25 Israeli Air Force warplanes") nor support for "The operation was aimed at maximizing damage while also maintaining an element of surprise."

Summary

The prose, MoS, images and several other areas now, IMO, meet the GA criteria - see checklist at top.
I checked two citations on my first run through and both had serious issues; in addition one paragraph was not cited at all. I have checked a further four, with three having serious issues. Given these I am going to fail this nomination. I would suggest that every cite is carefully checked against the text it is supposed to support before renomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:22, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]