Template:Did you know nominations/Azraq refugee camp
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Allen3 talk 12:35, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Azraq refugee camp[edit]
- ... that despite the enormity of the Syrian refugee crisis, the Azraq refugee camp in Jordan that is meant to house them has remained largely empty since its opening in 2014?
Created by Wasted Time R (talk). Self-nominated at 15:30, 13 March 2016 (UTC).
This article is new, long enough, no copyvio, and QPQ is good. But the article has some problems with NPOV and tone. For example, "Once the camp was open for a while it was clear that something was amiss" is pretty strong editorializing; there's also a lot of "only" language, ie, "the Azraq refugee camp still had only around 18,500 refugees." Can you run through the article to adjust the tone to be more in line with WP:NPOV? --Owlsmcgee (talk) 23:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for doing the review. I've replaced the sentence you objected to and I've added something about a new electricity project coming this year. But I don't see a reason to take out usages of "only". That the camp doesn't have nearly as many refugees as planned for, despite no shortage of refugees from the war, is a simple objective fact and the central point of interest for nearly every news story about the camp after the time of its opening. A neutral treatment in the article has to reflect that. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:18, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
