Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Battle of Badr/1
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
The "Battlefield" section has an orange "additional sources needed" banner at the top since March 2022. There are also uncited sections elsewhere in the article. The article relies too much upon long block quotes, particularily in the "Aftermath" section. Z1720 (talk) 04:21, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- Some of what is in the Battlefield is already covered in Battle. The last paragraph has a citation. We can just remove the uncited parts if need be. The aftermath section now has only one quote, and its an important quote. I've seen that particular quote from Muir being reproduced in several other works.VR (Please ping on reply) 04:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are also lots of primary references and sources written by Dawah publishers such as Darusallam. Overall, the article reads like a history lecture from a religious viewpoint. Quite a few important articles related to Islam suffered from what I presume to be activism rather than encyclopedic work. Recently the GA status of Muhammad in Islam was renounced for the same reason. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 19:19, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.