Talk:1963 Syrian coup d'état/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Arsenikk (talk · contribs) 22:37, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will review the article and have started a copyedit. I am not finished reading through the article and will, if necessary, come with additional comments later. Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:37, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Done Unless talking about terminology as such, do not write "describes", "refers to" etc. but say "is" or "was". (fixed) Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:37, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done "The landowner–peasant was..." a word missing there.
Done Perhaps you could elaborate what you mean with "became linked with" imperialist and colonialist powers.
Done There is a clarification needed tag.
Done I don't know how many times the Ba'ath Party is liked, but once is quite enough; the same goes for Ba'athism.
Done "the world learned that" is not an encyclopedic formulation. It also creates confusion as to if that was the date of the coup or it was the date it became known for some unknown delay reason.
Done Remember to convert to olde units for our American friends (as so they will convert to modern units for us). (fixed)
Done Several of the semicolons are not used correctly. Think of a semicolon as a pause which takes longer time than a comma but shorter time than a period. If you want to connect two parts of a sentence, use a dash (between the two first sentences a dash would have been possible, but a semicolon would not). You are also using a semicolon whenever a colon is called for.
Done commander-in-chief should be linked at the first occurrence, not the last.
Done The second paragraph under "immediate aftermath" is unreferenced.
Done Are there no relevant images? Portraits of involved people etc?
The background focuses a lot on class struggle. While this definitively was a major factor, there was also a geopolitical struggle in Syria during this period, especially between Damascus and Aleppo. Ba'ath was also largely an Alawi-dominated group; neither of these issues seem to be discussed in the background.
- The Alawi problem came when the Ba'ath seized power, figures like Salah Jadid, Muhammad Umran and Hafez al-Assad appointed fellow Alawites.. Before the 1963 coup was a large party with a moderate sized Sunni following... Its make up before 1963 can best be described as composing a majority of members from minority groups.. The Alawites became prominent during the power struggle of 1963-66 between the Aflaqites and the Military-wing (which was led more-or-less by Alawite officers). --TIAYN (talk) 16:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should read this article (its a good, albeit a short summary on the changes which took place in the Ba'ath Party during the 1963-66 period): --TIAYN (talk) 16:47, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ben-Tzur, Avraham (July 1968). "The Neo-Ba'th Party of Syria". Journal of Contemporary History. 3 (3). SAGE Publications: 161–181.

Sometimes it is hard to keep straight all the strains of history I have read at some time. Arsenikk ^(talk) 23:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree, I have the same problem - its one of the reasons I'm active on Wikipedia, writing about these topics somehow strengthen my memory on the subjects. --TIAYN (talk) 00:14, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article is within the Cold War navbox, but it does not discuss the issue. Did the revolution have an influence on Syria's alignment or politics between Syria and either superpower?

That came later; the original party leadership of Aflaq and al-Bitar supported a neutral line towards both the superpowers... The alignement to the USSR happened in the post-1966 Syrian coup d'etat. --TIAYN (talk) 10:05, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I have no way of checking the references, so all in-line references are accepted in good faith.

Placing on hold. I have done a slight copyedit, although most of the article is well-written, there were a few systematic errors I have commented on. Arsenikk ^(talk) 12:42, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll work on this. --TIAYN (talk) 16:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not force image sizes for thumbs (fixed). Arsenikk ^(talk) 23:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations with a good article. Arsenikk ^(talk) 23:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]