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

Nominator:Mayouhm (talk ·contribs)07:13, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer:Borsoka (talk·contribs)02:32, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – seeWP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is itwell written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with themanual of style guidelines forlead sections,layout,words to watch,fiction, andlist incorporation:

2. Is itverifiable withno original research, as shown by asource spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance withthe layout style guideline:

   B.Reliable sources arecited inline. All content thatcould 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):

   C. It containsno original research:

   D. It contains nocopyright violations norplagiarism:

3. Is itbroad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses themain aspects of the topic:

   B. It staysfocused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (seesummary style):

4. Is itneutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is itstable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoingedit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, byimages?

   A. Images aretagged with theircopyright status, andvalid non-free use rationales are provided fornon-free content:

   B. Images arerelevant to the topic, and havesuitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

I understand this is your first GA nomination. I’ve made a number of suggestions below, which are intended to be helpful; however, please feel free to disregard any that you feel would not improve the article or support closer alignment with the guidelines. If you do choose not to follow any of these suggestions, I would ask that you briefly explain your reasoning.Borsoka (talk)03:08, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• File:Allal Fassi (cropped).jpg: the PD tag at Commons does not reflect the image's copyright status according to the cited source.
• File:Allal al-Fassi.jpg: at Commons, the source at Commons does not verify, and the US PD tag is missing.
• File:Allal El Fassi 1949.png: further details are needed to identify the source (year of publication, publisher, identifier, such as ISBN, and page); the US PD tag is missing at Commons.
• File:Allal El Fassi 1949.png: at Commons, the source is a dead link, and the US PD tag is missing.
• File:Mekki Naciri, Abd el Jaleq Torres, Allal al Fassi, Ahmed ben Souda 1951.jpg: further details are needed to identify the source (author, year of publication, publisher, identifier, and page); the copyright status is unclear at Commons (the picture was published in a book).
• File:Arm transport meeting FLN.jpg: the source is a dead link at Commons.
• File:Allal El Fassi 1956.png: further details are needed to identify the source (year of publication, publisher, identifier, such as ISBN, and page); the US PD tag is missing at Commons.
• File:Recueil. Portraits d'Allal El Fassi, homme politique marocain (XXe s.) - btv1b85299742.jpg: the US PD tag is missing at Commons.
• File:Habib Burguiba, Abdallah Guennun y Allal El Fasi presidiendo un banquete en la ciudad de Tánger en abril de 1957.jpg: sourcing and copyright status are unclear at Commons.
• File:A meeting of Arab world revolutionaries.jpg: at Commons, the source does not verify the image, and the US PD tag is missing.
• File:Greater Morocco.svg: the map's factual accuracy is disputed at Commons.Borsoka (talk)03:08, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  On the map, that dispute was from 8 years ago and was just someone asking whether the map is actually a map based of a map from the source given or whoever drew that for Wikimedia's interpretation. On this page, I already have a citation going to "A History of the Western Sahara Conflict" with a drawing of the borders of the Istiqlal map. There's also the map in the book by Pennel and probably othersMayouhm (talk)10:28, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • So long as Commons indicates that the map’s factual accuracy is disputed, it cannot be used in this article.Borsoka (talk)05:51, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I removed the images and map for nowMayouhm (talk)10:47, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure this is the best approach. For instance, the lack of US PD tag can fixed easily at Commons.Borsoka (talk)04:12, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Truth be told, I honestly don't know too much about the US PD tag stuff. I had a feeling that images like File:Recueil. Portraits d'Allal El Fassi, homme politique marocain (XXe s.) - btv1b85299742.jpg that only had the US PD tag missing could probably get restored but just not too sure how to do itMayouhm (talk)11:08, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neither do I know which US PD tag could be used, so I request@Nikkimaria: for advice.Borsoka (talk)01:28, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

US PD tagging is typically based on date of publication. If you know the date, you can usethis chart to identify the correct tag.Nikkimaria (talk)01:30, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do I figure out whether an image like File:Recueil. Portraits d'Allal El Fassi, homme politique marocain (XXe s.) - btv1b85299742.jpg was published in compliance with US formalities or only published abroad?Mayouhm (talk)11:28, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to seek advice on this atWikipedia:Teahouse, where they can point you towards the appropriate WikiProject or editor. I will place the article on hold while you address the points above. Please ping me when you are finished. If I do not hear from you, I will close the review in early February.Borsoka (talk)06:04, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mayouhm: have you sought and received assistance as suggested above?Borsoka (talk)04:32, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I asked for the image I asked about and it seems to not be in the public domain. It's currently nominated for deletionMayouhm (talk)12:57, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Some sources are listed in the “Sources” section, while others are cited only as references (for example, references 3, 4, and 5). Is there a specific reason for this distinction?Borsoka (talk)03:08, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  A source I would only cite from a specific page/set of pages rather than one I would cite throughout multiple pages I did not put in the sources section. Do I need to make all the citations with Harvnb or everything with normal {{Cite etc.}} template? I assumed you could use both since I've seen good and featured articles use both simultaneously?Mayouhm (talk)10:36, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]