Jump to content

Talk:Conflict Intelligence Team

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Conflict Intelligence Team/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Ktkvtsh (talk · contribs) 18:02, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 13:53, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]


I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:53, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Earwig finds no issues.

  • What makes tv2.today a reliable source?
    The source is still in the article; it's FN 4. I'm not saying it's unreliable, but I can't tell enough about it to know whether it's a reliable source or not. Can you say why you think it's reliable? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:20, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecks; footnote numbers refer to this version:

  • FN 12 cites "By examining photographs and maps, the CIT also disproved the official Russian thesis that Russian troops in Syria did not participate in ground battles." Verified, but I would change "thesis" to something like "position" or "statements"; a thesis is an argument for something, and this is just a simple assertion.
  • FN 9 cites "On March 5, 2022, CIT announced that it had left Russia in order to be able to continue working." Verified.
  • FN 15 cites "CIT clarified the biography details of the suspects in the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in 2018." Verified, but I would credit Bellingcat, The Insider and Proekt as well, as the source does, and I think it would be better to just say "provided their real names" rather than "clarified the biography details", which is vague.
  • FN 1 cites "The Conflict Intelligence Team (CIT) is an independent investigative organisation originating from Russia". Verified.
  • The lead should be a summary of the body -- that is, there shouldn't be any information in the lead that is not in the body. Here's that's not the case -- the body needs to say that CIT is an investigative organization, and that it's one of thne largest groups to emerge from the Russo-Ukrainian War, and so on. I would suggest moving the whole first paragraph down into the history section, where it would fit without any changes, and then writing a new lead of four or five sentences that summarizes the whole article.
    Looking at this again I think the lead is OK, so I'm striking this -- it's a bit short but it's good enough. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:25, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll read through again once these points are addressed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:14, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ktkvtsh, are you planning to work on this? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I will work on this today. Thanks for the reminder. Ktkvtsh (talk) 17:20, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Christie, done. Ktkvtsh (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More comments.

  • "after which he joined actions of the Russian opposition and created a company performing online broadcasts of various actions, in particular, Euromaidan". What does "joined actions" refer to? And does "created a company" refer to starting WiU? If so I think it would be better to say so. And I think a couple of words inline to define Euromaidan would be helpful -- it's not that widely known a term.
  • "In comparison to the other similar groups, CIT is distinguished by small number of participants (6 people) and the fact that they are all citizens of Russia" suggest "CIT, with six participants, is smaller than other similar organizations, and is also unusual in that all six are citizens of Russia".
  • "Leviev was charged in exile for Violating the March 'fake news' law": no need for a capital V. What is the March 'fake news' law? Is there a Wikipedia article we could link to?
  • "CIT has carried out a number of internationally recognized investigations": what is in the source to support "internationally recognized"? It sounds a bit like a peacock phrase.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:41, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie, I believe I have addressed all issues. Ktkvtsh (talk) 14:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One point left above. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 07:06, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your guidance. This issue is now taken care of. Ktkvtsh (talk) 13:28, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When you say "created a company performing online broadcasts of various actions" is this referring to WiU? Or something else? It's not clear from the text in the article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ktkvtsh, just making sure you saw this -- this is the only outstanding issue preventing promotion to GA. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:48, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks. I am at a convention for work. I’ll work on this Saturday. Ktkvtsh (talk) 23:13, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, great; no hurry. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a hyperlink to Russo-Ukrainian War to add more context. Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:48, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What I was asking about is the phrase "created a company". Is this company WiU/CIT? It's not clear from the article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you mean. I changed it from a company to the company. I think this will help the reader understand better. Ktkvtsh (talk) 02:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That does it. Passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:56, 1 July 2024‎ (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Conflict_Intelligence_Team&oldid=1232286059"