Wikipedia:Featured article review/History of Central Asia/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was removed 06:27, 29 January 2007.

---

History of Central Asia

Review commentary

Messages left at SimonP, Central Asia, and History. Sandy (Talk) 23:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

This is in need of a major update, as this does not appear to take into account the last seven years of Central Asian history, other than a brief mention of the color revolutions. Notable facts not mentioned in this article: Karimov is on the verge of launching Uzbekistan into a war with all his neighbors over land, Niyazov died, Kazakhstan is almost, and may already be, a majority Christian nation, the EITR terrorist organization is fighting for independence and the Islamicization of Turkestan, Kazakhstan has not done nuclear testing for years and no longer has nuclear weapons, the 2001 War in Afghanistan, India has gotten a military base - its first - in Tajikistan, construction of the BTC pipeline, discovery of petroleum fields in Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, and the AIDS accident that led to Dosayev's dismissal and is still claiming victims. KazakhPol 01:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

You have to be careful about adding too many recent events to articles like this. This page has to cover several millenia of history, and already more than 10% is on just the last fifteen years. The ideal solution would be to create some sub-articles, such as has been done with most national history articles. A History of Central Asia since 1991 page would be able to cover the events you listed in proper detail. - SimonP 03:11, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

What an incredibly huge topic for a single article! However, regarding solely the reason for this proposed FAR, can't this information just be added in a section on the past 7 years? As it's an article about history, that it hasn't been updated with events of the past 7 years is only a current and remediable omission, not a failing of the entire article. Is there anything else wrong with the article, that should cause it to be reviewed as a FA? If this is not the case, how about a post, instead, on the WikiProject Central Asia board requesting this update, and on the talk page requesting this update? Or have you tried that? And ditto, SimonP's comments. The topic is just immense! The last 7 years are merely a blip. KP Botany 03:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with KazakhPol, the period since independence is the most densely packed with history of a regional and perhaps global scale since Chinggis Han, it's no longer a Soviet backwater or merely a pawn in the new Great Game, and deserves an update. Chris 03:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Fails 1c, largely uncited, mixed reference styles, footnotes that are provided aren't formatted correctly. Sandy (Talk) 10:31, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. "Since 1991" is tragic!!! It completely fails to grasp the current momentum of events! It generalizes and fails to give the appropriate infos. Terrible! What about the internal tensions in all these countries? The challenges these totalitarian regimes faced? The role of Russia and its antagonism with USA? The efforts of Russia to control the natural sources (petroleum and natural gas) in this area, which is the true essence of a hypogeous energy war? Anyway ... I think this article treats a very interesting topic. It actually looks like a challenge to try and save it. I might give it a shot but I promise nothing. First, I'll do some search to see what I can do with citing and then we'll see. In case I undertake the task to save this article, I definitely need somebody to copy-edit.--Yannismarou 18:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

• Would not pass 1a or 1c in the FAC room. Here are random examples of why this needs a thorough copye-edit throughout.
  • Opening: "The history of Central Asia has been determined primarily by the area's climate and geography. The aridity of the region makes agriculture difficult, and its distance from the sea cut it off from much trade." Great concepts, but clash of tenses ("has been determined" vs simple past "cut").
  • "Turkic expansion begain in the 6th century, and following the Göktürk emipre,..." Typo, and do you mean "following the fall of the G empire"? That would be more nutural.
  • Audit the whole thing for commas; one is definitely missing here: "One of those powers, the Parthian Empire was of Central Asian origin, but adopted Persian cultural traditions." And here: "With no cities and little wealth other than the herds they brought with them the nomads had nothing ...".
  • Overlinked. Why "16th century", "firearms", genetics, and "chariots"? Please don't distract the readers with unfocused links. (Yet "wheat" is quite focused as a link, unusually.) Needs to ration the blue speckling.
  • Seriously under-referenced. Tony 05:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
• Move to FARC, no edits since Tony's review. Yannis has done some work on the article, but refs are still incorrectly formatted, mixed referencing styles, and undercited. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• Move to FARC per SandyGeorgia. KazakhPol 02:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

FARC commentary

Suggested FA criteria concern is non-up-to-date coverage. Marskell 11:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment and remove. I don't think I have the time to work from scratch on the article. I'm sorry, but as it is now it is under FA status. Maybe we'll be able to re-nominate it in FAc within the next months.--Yannismarou 21:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
• Remove KazakhPol 21:16, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
• Remove Insufficient citations. LuciferMorgan 02:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.