Talk:Mishmar HaEmek/GA2

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Ganesha811 (talk · contribs) 16:29, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm opening a Good Article Nomination review. Hoping to complete the review over the next couple of days. I'll be using the template below. Thanks! Ganesha811 (talk) 16:29, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the slow review, real life and holidays have intervened! Resuming shortly. Ganesha811 (talk) 01:53, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have begun the work. I really liked your opinion about the history section. I used it as guide and rewritten a third of it. I have arranged the "prestate" section into a subsection named "establishment", which refers to all events until 1947, and then starts two other subsections solely about the security-political situation of the kibbutz, so there's the history of the kibbutz until 1948 and military history of the kibbutz until 1948. I'll address more issues later. For you I advise to re-read the "establishment" section because I've changed the wording there without changing the content or touching the sources. Just see whether it makes sense to an English reader. As for the population statistics, the history sections say what sources say, while the demographics only refers to censuses. Still a problem?--Bolter21 (talk to me) 18:12, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually all of the history up until 1948 was edited.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 19:03, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bolter21, thanks for your responses and edits! They look good, overall. I'll continue with the review. Ganesha811 (talk) 16:19, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bolter21 - the article is much improved but there are a number of grammatical issues and other peculiarities of language. I understand this is tough as a non-native English speaker so I'd recommend requesting a copyedit by the WP:GUILD. The GA review can be put on hold until that is complete. Some sourcing issues also need to be addressed - see Table item 2a. Ganesha811 (talk) 16:04, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest continueing the review and I'll do as much as I can to fix the English and as soon as most issues will be solved and only a copy edit will be required, then we would put the review on halt until it will be done by proffessionals. It is not wise to copyedit the article now, becuause possibly there is more content to be added (such as, for example, the landscape around the kibbutz, climate, the forest, etc.) and then we will need another copy edit, which will just take more time.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 16:56, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bolter21, if the article is going to undergo substantial expansion it's probably not the right time for a GA review to be ongoing - GA reviews require the article to be stable to be assessed correctly. I'm happy to continue the review and let you fix issues but putting it on hold doesn't mean giving up on it, it's just a mechanism to pause until the article is in a place you're happy with it and then I can return to re-assess. Ganesha811 (talk) 17:02, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know last time I've made a GA review the article was expanded with suggestions from the reviewers.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 13:16, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Let's make it easy. If you have any more suggestions on what you think is missing in the article or any non-grammatical issues, list them, I'll address them and then submit the article to the Guild. When they will finish we'll resume the review. How's that?--Bolter21 (talk to me) 13:31, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bolter21, sounds good. For now the issues that I see are the ones listed below, especially under 1a (prose) and 2a (sourcing). Ganesha811 (talk) 14:07, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copy. Then I'll begin working. Review is on halt.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 14:14, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ganesha811, a review was made by the GOCE and I have no mor sources to add right now so we can resume the review. Bolter21--141.226.92.178 (talk) 06:37, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, I'll take another look through soon. Thanks! Ganesha811 (talk) 15:31, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well? Ganesha811--Bolter21 (talk to me) 11:02, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bolter21, my apologies, this simply slipped my mind with some other stuff going on. I'll take a look in the next couple days. Ganesha811 (talk) 13:45, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing this tonight. Ganesha811 (talk) 16:55, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so having taken another look, a few things stand out:

Overall, the article is much improved. Great work!
It still feels uneven. The history section is badly weighted towards events from 1926-1948 - I understand they were exciting times in the region's history, but either an increase in summarization for that period or an expansion of the 1950-present section would be appropriate.
Some sentences seem to have been thrown in willy-nilly - for instance the last sentence in the History about the 110 new housing units. When did the project start? Is it ongoing? Why is this relevant to the Wiki page?
There are some grammatical issues, though I can go through and fix those myself later.

Overall, keep working on this - we're nearly there! Ganesha811 (talk) 13:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I am going to search through 20th century newspapers to find some interesting stories about Mishmar HaEmek post independence. One thing I wanted to do in the past and didn't was to cover the political affiliation of the residents who are clearly identified with the Israeli left. Maybe now its the time to dig in, shouldn't be that difficult. I'll also check the these willy-nilly-thrown sentences I saw you noted. Quick note, the residential expansion is relevent becuase now the kibbutz has about 1,200 residents, and 110 housing units can increase the population of the kibbutz by more than 20% which is fairly large. Unfortunately there aren't many written sources about it and I am struggling to state the obvious without breaking the rules of WP:OR.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 10:02, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	In general, the prose is quite good, but the History section needs organization - some sentences seem placed at random or contain information unrelated to the main thrust of the paragraph. For example, this paragraph: "In 1947, Mishmar HaEmek had a population.... filmed here" does not work well within the context of the paragraphs before - focus on military history obscures this cultural history. The section "after the establishment of israel" is better. Mostly addressed. The "prestate history" header really needs to be changed - neither neutral nor clear in meaning to a non-Israeli reader. Addressed. Statistics about population are found both in the History section and in the Demographics. Probably better confined to Demographics. Some duplication at present. Partially addressed. Why is HaShomer HaTzair capitalized the first time it is used but given as "Hashomer Hatzair" the second time? Is it a Hebrew thing or just inconsistent? It might be worth mentioning the archaeological site in the lead. "now" instead of "know" in 'Establishment, 3rd paragraph Second to last sentence of that 3rd paragraph is grammatically incorrect and seems oddly placed - rephrase - maybe "At the time it was the only Jewish settlement in this part of the valley", if that is indeed the intended meaning. Remove "here" in 3rd-to-last paragraph of 'Establishment' and in the subsequent paragraph - replace with 'at Mishmar HaEmek' or some other phrasing. in 'Great Arab Revolt...' "by nearby Arab villagers" instead of 'by the nearby Arabs villagers'. Separate sentence for the command, right now it's a run-on.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Pass. Complies with manual of style, no issues.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	The claim in 'Demographics' that the residents are secular Jews does not seem strongly-enough supported by the linked source, which is not necessarily reliable. The statement as written implies that all current residents are secular, which seems like a strong claim. The second paragraph in 'Archaeology' is uncited - is the material coming from previously cited references? More specific citations would be helpful - we shouldn't have a full paragraph bereft of references. What is the source for "described by a member as 'a crime greater than murder'" in 'Great Arab Revolt'?
	2b. 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).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Pass. No issues detected.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	The geography section seems sparse - what is the landscape like around the kibbutz? What about climate? As part of a biosphere reserve there is also material that could be added related to that.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Pass. Good focus, not overdetailed.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	I'm not sure that "Prestate" history is a NPOV way of describing history before 1948, as it implies there was no state in the region. Change heading to something more neutral, maybe talking about Mandatory Palestine or similar
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Pass. No issues, most work done months ago, no edit warring.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	No issues - pass.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	No issues - pass.
	7. Overall assessment.

Status query[edit]

Bolter21, Ganesha811, what is the status of this nomination/review? The last post here was nearly six weeks ago, the last edit to the article was three days after that, which is a long time since with nothing happening. Are there plans to get back to this soon? This was nominated over a year ago, and took nearly ten months to get a review going, so there's naturally going to be more leeway, but it's important to get things moving. (I did check, and it appears that no request has yet been made to the Guild of Copy Editors, but if there's significant additional work to be done with the content, it makes sense to hold off on the copyedit.) Thanks to you both. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:04, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BlueMoonset, my understanding is that the nomination is on hold until copyedits and other needed changes can be made. I agree it has been a while... Bolter21, when will you have time to work on this article? Let's figure out what our next steps should be. Ganesha811 (talk) 04:27, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It has been a rough couple of months and I struggle to find time for Wikipedia. I have now submitted the article to the Guild of Copyeditors and now wait for them. As soon as the article will be copyedited we could resume the review.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 11:33, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bolter21, I'm sorry things have been rough for you lately. If you can find the time now, I would strongly recommend that you work on the other issues Ganesha811 has already raised in the review as soon as possible, so that the GOCE, when they are able to start (probably in two to three weeks), can copyedit that material, too. Best of luck. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:12, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Most of the issues were resolved, the main thing to work on now is the Geography section. I struggled to find sources back in 2017, now I'll try my luck again.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 09:26, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020[edit]

Ganesha811 I've continued the work. A quick summary of my work:

Overall copyediting
Improved the lead section
Moved historical information from the "Education" section to the "History" section
Enlarged the post-1948 section:
- Background of the Tama factory
- Added information about the dining hall building
- The story of Keren Yesha
- The large event in 1990
- Information about the new neighborhood
Removed the written form of the British censuses in the "Demographics" section. The information already exists in the table
Added information about an archaeological exhibition--Bolter21 (talk to me) 14:03, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Bolter21, great, I'll take another look. Thank you for your continuing work on this article! Ganesha811 (talk) 15:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Based on my review, this is now a Good Article and I have passed it! Congrats and thank you again for your considerable effort to bring this article up to standard. You should be proud. Ganesha811 (talk) 14:23, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ganesha811 Thank you very much for your time and dedicated review. It was an unexpectedly long journey and I am very satisfied with the outcome, I didn't think this article could be expanded further. Thanks again and stay healthy these days. If your government calls you to stay home just stay and keep up the good work here.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 19:04, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]