Talk:Early returns in Egyptian polls show victory for Islamist parties

Active discussions

Review of revision 1333489 [Not ready]Edit

Point 1: yes there is. The Guardian source: "Al-Nour, a more conservative Salafist party, looks likely to secure second place." There is differences in spelling between sources, so I went with Wikipedia's spelling ("Al Nour").

Point 2: Hmm, okay. There is mention from one of the protestors in the articles about how he is surprised about the success of the Salafis. But I can rephrase/remove if it isn't acceptable. —Tom Morris (talk) 20:06, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

  • You're right about Al Nour, I forgot the wildly inconsistent treatment of al; it's mentioned by WSET too. If what you're saying about it is multi-sourced, attribution won't be necessary (would have to check this point more closely).
  • The use of future tense is problematic as noted, and one also oughtn't paint the whole of a group with sentiments expressed by one person in it. Some sort of rephrasing is called for.
  • Don't forget to resubmit for review when ready. (I can probably get back for another review in a bit.)
--Pi zero (talk) 20:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Review of revision 1333595 [Passed]Edit

Return to "Early returns in Egyptian polls show victory for Islamist parties" page.