I did consider modifying the headline to explicitly mention it's the first time, but that turns out to be tricky. As the headline is, it implies there's something extraordinary about appointing four women to the council. Exactly how extraordinary it is, the lede then explains. An alternative suggested was to insert "for first time" after "four women", thus "Qatar appoints four women for first time to its law-drafting Shura Council", but on reflection, that actually weakens the impact; it sounds as if these four women are being appointed for the first time, which kind of implies there have been other women, in fact there may be others now, but they've been there for a while whereas these four are being appointed there for the first time. The advice in the style guide is that the headline should "tell the most important and unique thing", and in fact the appointment of four women to the council is the really unique thing here.
At first I was a bit puzzled by the relationship between the five-month crisis with other countries in the region, and progressive policy actions. Studying the sources I finally had the insight that they're suggesting — without ever saying it directly (which would, after all, be commentary) — that Qatar is trying to improve its relations with the wider international community since it's lost local allies in the current crisis. That's a nuance it would be nice if we could brining out more clearly for our readers — the trick is that we don't want to bias our readers toward the conclusion, but we would like to aid our readers in being able to see it as a possibility.
The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.
I did consider modifying the headline to explicitly mention it's the first time, but that turns out to be tricky. As the headline is, it implies there's something extraordinary about appointing four women to the council. Exactly how extraordinary it is, the lede then explains. An alternative suggested was to insert "for first time" after "four women", thus "Qatar appoints four women for first time to its law-drafting Shura Council", but on reflection, that actually weakens the impact; it sounds as if these four women are being appointed for the first time, which kind of implies there have been other women, in fact there may be others now, but they've been there for a while whereas these four are being appointed there for the first time. The advice in the style guide is that the headline should "tell the most important and unique thing", and in fact the appointment of four women to the council is the really unique thing here.
At first I was a bit puzzled by the relationship between the five-month crisis with other countries in the region, and progressive policy actions. Studying the sources I finally had the insight that they're suggesting — without ever saying it directly (which would, after all, be commentary) — that Qatar is trying to improve its relations with the wider international community since it's lost local allies in the current crisis. That's a nuance it would be nice if we could brining out more clearly for our readers — the trick is that we don't want to bias our readers toward the conclusion, but we would like to aid our readers in being able to see it as a possibility.
The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.
I suggest we flag the discussion there but not here. After all, if we eliminate the category, that will ensure that something gets done about this particular article, along with all the others (which was my reasoning when I added this article to the category). --Pi zero (talk) 21:28, 11 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
