Talk:Arab migrations to the Maghreb/GA2

GA Review

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

Nominator: Skitash (talk · contribs) 17:05, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Abo Yemen (talk · contribs) 08:51, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bismillah, Ill be talking this one. Good luck! Abo Yemen ✉ 08:51, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-review

Prior to an in-depth review, I will analyze the article for any criteria for immediate failure.

It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria

seems fine to me

It contains copyright violations

with 15.3% according to Earwig's Copyvio Detector, it's good to go

It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include {{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags (See also {{QF}})

Doesn't have any

It is not stable due to edit warring on the page

Page is protected but there doesn't seem to be any edit war

It has issues noted in a previous GA review that still have not been adequately addressed, as determined by a reviewer who has not previously reviewed the article

Last time the article was quickfailed due to a copyright violation, but this doesn't seem like the case now

Alright Ima get to the actual review in a bit Abo Yemen ✉ 11:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.^[1]

Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);^[2]

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;^[3] and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

^[4]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

^[5]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.^[6]

Notes

^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^ Footnotes must be used for in-line citations.
^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

Review

Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(b) (MoS)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined

Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(c) (original research)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Pass

Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(b) (focused)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Comment	Result
Relatively new and no sign of edit warring or ongoing	Pass

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	The reviewer has left no comments here	On hold
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	The reviewer has left no comments here	On hold

Result

Result	Notes
Undetermined	The reviewer has left no comments here

Discussion

Images

@Skitash: Ill start with the maps. Do File:Muslim conquest of the Maghreb.png and File:Mouvement des Tribus Souliem et hilal.png have any sources backing them up? Abo Yemen ✉ 16:50, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not quite sure. I'll ping the authors responsible for creating those maps to ask about their sources @Cattette @NBelazi. Skitash (talk) 17:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

@Skitash: In the Rashidun and Umayyad era (7th–8th century) section,
Throughout the period of conquest, Arab migrants settled in all parts of the Maghreb, arriving as peaceful newcomers that were welcomed everywhere. Large Arab settlements were established in several areas. A considerable portion of the Arab settlers belonged to the Najdi tribe of Banu Tamim.
cited by source no. 12; Why isn't anything related to the conversion to Islam mentioned here although it was quoted in the source cited?

Same paragraph next sentence, why is the 70,000 Arab migrants figure not mentioned tho quoted in source no. 4? Abo Yemen ✉ 17:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Why isn't anything related to the conversion to Islam mentioned here although it was quoted in the source cited?" Conversion to Islam is already mentioned in the preceding sentence where it says "This gradual process led to the conversion of the Berbers to Islam...", but I ensured that the focus remained primarily on the core topic of the article (the Arab migrations), while leaving the effects of these migrations in the respective #Impact section (where Islamization is discussed).

"why is the 70,000 Arab migrants figure not mentioned tho quoted in source no. 4?" Although it is mentioned in the source, the figure seems to be a WP:FRINGE estimate, as most other sources (see sources no. 1, 2, and 13) agree that around 150,000 Arabs moved into the region during the early Muslim conquest. Let me know if you still think the 70,000 figure should be mentioned. Skitash (talk) 17:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

source number 12 had a specific wording but none of it was included in that sentence
It is surprising to realize how irresistibly the Berbers were attracted to Islam. In the course of conquest, they adopted the Islamic faith en masse, but at first this acceptance barely constituted more than lip-service. They continued to adhere to Islam because its clear and simple doctrine attracted them.

As for the 70,000 figure, yeah I see why it shouldn't be included Abo Yemen ✉ 18:19, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've included additional information about the Berbers' conversion to Islam. Skitash (talk) 23:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.

[2] Footnotes must be used for in-line citations.

[3] This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.

[4] Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.

[5] Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.

[6] The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]