The result was: promoted by
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 08:20, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
5x expanded by Mohamed CJ ( talk). Self nominated at 11:16, 23 June 2014 (UTC).
In 2004, bilateral trade between the countries was worth ÂŁ230 millionis unsourced. Normally, I wouldn't jump on this, but as its the only content for the section, a source would be appropriate here, or just removing it for now. 5x expansion size and date requirements check out. Edits since the last review have not been substantial (I've made a few edits for phrasing and MOS corrections). For the sources that are available online (like the Almahood paper), I've checked for cases of close paraphrasing and found nothing concerning. The hook's length is fine and is cited to specific page reference in the Khuri publication (looks like a textbook), so I'm inclined to AGF on this one. The quotation is interesting-- not very contractual language there for an agreement! The content otherwise reads neutrally and appropriate citations are provided throughout the article. As long as something can be done about the trade section, I think this is ready to go. I, JethroBT drop me a line 22:03, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 08:20, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
5x expanded by Mohamed CJ ( talk). Self nominated at 11:16, 23 June 2014 (UTC).
In 2004, bilateral trade between the countries was worth ÂŁ230 millionis unsourced. Normally, I wouldn't jump on this, but as its the only content for the section, a source would be appropriate here, or just removing it for now. 5x expansion size and date requirements check out. Edits since the last review have not been substantial (I've made a few edits for phrasing and MOS corrections). For the sources that are available online (like the Almahood paper), I've checked for cases of close paraphrasing and found nothing concerning. The hook's length is fine and is cited to specific page reference in the Khuri publication (looks like a textbook), so I'm inclined to AGF on this one. The quotation is interesting-- not very contractual language there for an agreement! The content otherwise reads neutrally and appropriate citations are provided throughout the article. As long as something can be done about the trade section, I think this is ready to go. I, JethroBT drop me a line 22:03, 3 August 2014 (UTC)