Talk:Maghrebi script

404 Page not found

The first external link, "Islamic calligraphy", is broken. — Tonymec (talk) 19:54, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Maghrebi script. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060419084754/http://www.habous.gov.ma/ar/detail.aspx?id=475&Z=10&S=10 to http://www.habous.gov.ma/ar/detail.aspx?id=475&z=10&s=10

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:34, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Maghrebi script/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cerebellum (talk · contribs) 13:08, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I will be reviewing this article. It may take me a few days. --Cerebellum (talk) 13:08, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Ian, this was a fun article to review! The quality and variety of the illustrations is fantastic, I don't know if I've seen any other article on the Arab world with such good images. It's especially valuable for writing about a script, since just describing the script doesn't get the point across as well as an image. The prose is also very high-quality. The only concerns I have are a few about the content and organization, and the references, all detailed below. I hope I don't come across as too critical of the references, I actually like that you use so many Arabic sources - in some articles I've written using only English sources I feel like I'm just scratching the surface of the topic, using Arabic allows you to write a much more thorough article. I'll place the article on hold for seven days to allow you to respond to my comments. --Cerebellum (talk) 13:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

@إيان: I'll have to regretfully fail the article for now as it has been more than seven days, please let me know if you renominate and I hope I can review it again! --Cerebellum (talk) 19:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Content

• Lead: I think the lead should be expanded so that it provides a better summary of the article. I recommend adding a paragraph summarizing the history, and one on the variations.
• Organization. I recommend moving the section "contrast with Mashreqi scripts" to the beginning of the article, and expanding it to describe the script more extensively. It could include the information from the lead about how the the script has extended horizontal features and final open curves.
• Imperial patronage: Aside from the Nasrids, did any other Andalusi dynasties patronize Maghrebi script?
• Contrast with Mashreqi scripts: The last sentence here, about the ulama and the printing press, doesn't seem to fit the rest of the section, seems like it should be in history.
• Italics: I think the use of italics is a little inconsistent, which is common in articles about the Arab world. MOS:FOREIGNITALIC says that foreign words should be in italics unless they have common use in English, which is a bit vague. I don't care which words you italicize as long as it is consistent, but Mashreq is italicized in some places while Mashreqi is not. The other ones I'm not sure about are Biled as-Sudan (italicized, but al-Andalus isn't), al-Maghreb al-Aqsa (italicized), and mujawher (sometimes italic, sometimes not).

Referencing

• I think it is helpful to add English translations of source titles, otherwise the article is not very accessible for non-Arabic speakers. At a minimum, author and publisher names should be in English. I've made the changes for a few of the refs.
• Several books are cited without page numbers, are you able to add the page numbers?
• Reference #3 surprised me, when I clicked on the link it downloaded an executable file. I did not run the file, is there any way to view this document in the browser?
• For reference #6, are all the citations to the same page, 3749? If not you should specify the page number each time you cite the work.
• Reference #38 does not support the sentence about Qundusi, it is just a print of his calligraphy. Do you have another source?