Jump to content

Talk:Asifa Lahore

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeAsifa Lahore was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 29, 2024Good article nomineeNot listed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 24, 2024.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that in 2014, BBC Three cancelled a debate on being gay and Muslim featuring Asifa Lahore, a Muslim drag queen, citing security concerns at the mosque where it was filmed?

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


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

Nominator: GnocchiFan (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Kusma (talk · contribs) 16:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


I am sorry you have been waiting for this review for such a long time, but it is still a quickfail. At 2074 bytes / 359 words, this is barely long enough for DYK and there is no evidence this is anywhere near broad coverage. A huge amount of the sourcing is basically interviews. There seem to be source to text fidelity issues ("The two separated quickly" is not the same as "after six months, during which time he sought out counselling and support from LGBT charities, he ended the relationship"). The subject's civil union / marriage / susbsequent separation is not mentioned. We learn almost nothing about "Muslim Drag Queens", "Punjabi Girl" or "Always Asifa". This is nowhere near being a Good Article and needs a massive expansion before it is worth looking at the prose in detail. —Kusma (talk) 16:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.