Democratic Left Movement (Lebanon) has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result July 21, 2009 Peer review Reviewed August 6, 2009 Good article nominee Listed
Current status: Good article

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Socialism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Lebanon Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lebanon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lebanon-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LebanonWikipedia:WikiProject LebanonTemplate:WikiProject LebanonLebanon articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics: Political parties Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Should this not be at Democratic Left Movement (Lebanon) or Movement of the Democratic Left? Palmiro | Talk 14:24, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's neither an official translation or website for this movement, nor a WP naming convention about party and movement related articles, so I think you're free to change the title. CG 20:36, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

it's the same name, isn't it? but i'm okay with the merger, go ahead. there is an official web site though: www.democratic-left.org. there, the name is given in the heading as just "the democratic left(ist)", but that is probably an abbreviated form, since it is at other places in the page written as "democratic left(ist) movement in lebanon". Arre 18:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

update on that: they abbreviate themselves as DLM in english, as in "DLM radio".

Could someone define the word "courant", as used in "However, DLM supports the existence of courants ..." and in several instances following. teneriff 03:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lebanese democratic left movement.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:30, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The following are additional comments I intended to raise at the peer review, which was closed before I got back to it:-

• History section - Foundation

**Suggest change section name to "Early history", as it only deals with the foundation in September 2004, and the assassinations a year later.

 Done

**To avoid repetitions of the full title "Lebanese Communist Party" I have introduced the acronym "LCP" a few times, or otherwise referred to "the party"

 Done

• • "These activists and intellectuals who split from the LCP..." Is this the same group who, in the previous paragraph, called itself "the reform and democracy forces in the Lebanese Communist Party"? When did they formally split from the LCP?
  • You refer to the DLM being established at a ceremony "in September 2004". Can we have the actual date of this ceremony?: Done

*Assassinations: Why the multiple citations in the first sentence? Simple matters of fact need only a single, reliable source. As it stands, the sentence is difficult to read. Same point arises in the second paragraph. *The Structure and composition section has one brief subsection on internal elections, but tells us nothing of the DML's structure and composition. In the Internal elections subsection:-

 Done

**The word "own" in the first sentence is unnecessary : Done **The term "National Assembly", in this usage, needs a bit of explanation. I take it to be the ruling committee of the new party, but this needs to be clarified.

 Done

**Rather than "not lose", say "retain": Done **"...while insisting on being a part of March 14." What does this mean?

 Done

• • Final sentence needs further clarification. The voting percentages don't really tell us anything - you haven't given percentages for Atallah's lot. How many seats in the Assembly did each group win?
• Political stances

**Ideology: "Thus, the DLM's ideology is a broad leftist platform that forms the common denominator among its constituents." Whose summary is this? If it is part of the Majed interview, it ought to be attributed to him. **Domestic Policy: Wording like "one of the few parties", "vehemently", "strongly" give this section a POV feel. You need to remove non-neutral adjectives to remain encyclopedic. : Done

• Political activities

**Cedar revolution: POV - suggest delete "unprecedented" and change "meddling" to "interference". Also, is "presumably from Syria" part of the stated goal, or is this editorial assumption? : Done **Electoral results: "Representing the Maronite seat of Tripoli..." doesn't make sense (a seat representing a seat?) Rewording required. Also, this is the fourth mention of the March 14 Alliance, without any explanation of what it is. : Done

Hope these comments help. Brianboulton (talk) 19:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm working on it. Mnation2 (talk) 03:18, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Democratic Left Movement (Lebanon)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Review process started. Yazan (talk) 05:41, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This a well-written compact article, good job!

Nonetheless, there are a few issues that need to be fixed before it can be promoted to GA:

• For a short article the lead is quite long, I would suggest slimming it down a little bit.

 Done

The lead looks much better. My concern was not as much how long it is but about sections like Hawi's assasination which I still think should be removed because the lead is supposed to focus fully on the DLM (and it is mentioned elsewhere in the article). Another thing you might want to take note of, since the lead only summarizes the article and (I suppose) everything in the lead is already referenced in the article, you might want to take out unnecessary refs to reduce clutter. Other than that it looks good.Yazan (talk) 05:53, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I got rid of all citations for uncontroversial claims cited elsewhere in the article. As for the assassinations, I was specifically told in the peer review I received for this article that they must be included in the lead as it summarizes the contents of the article and does not just provide context for the subject.Mnation2 (talk) 03:07, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the assassination of Kassir certainly belongs there, but not Hawi. Hawi was maybe an ally, a personal friend to many in the movement, but he had no active role in it (if he did, then you must specify it and its importance later in the article). Yazan (talk) 03:11, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hawi, as the article states, campaigned for Elias Atallah in the DLM's electoral debut during Lebanon's 2005 elections (and was killed a day after Atallah was elected). He also, as the Ziad Majid interview states, "was trying to bring the communist party, or at least part of it, to join efforts" with the DLM. What else needs to be said? Mnation2 (talk) 15:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the lead looks good now. It's not a major detail anyway, but I still don't think Hawi's assasination should be in the lead, but if that's what you prefer... Yazan (talk) 02:27, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The history section needs a little expansion. There's a little gap between Foundation and the Cedar Revolution. What was the movement's role in the Lebanese crisis before the Hariri assassination. What were their alliances, etc. etc.

 Done

• The cedar revolution section should be a part of the History section.

 Done

• Please expand the general elections section with actual numbers and percentage of votes.

 Done

• Maybe you can also add a photo of Kassir, since it's very relevant to this article.

 Done

• The structure and composition section needs expansion as well. The section only mentions the last internal elections, but it doesn't explain the mechanism and internal structure (How many members is the National Assembly, how is it elected, it mentions that people outside of lebanon were able to participate (how?), what other organizational structures (other than the National Assembly) are part of the movement, etc. etc.). Does the movement have any publications, media outlets? It should be mentioned as well. Maybe a little overview also about the demographics of the movement members (number, age groups, any internal currents? (not necessary but quite helpful)).

 Done

I'm going to sleep for tonight and will finish this section within twelve hours. If you could refrain from the review until then, I would be incredibly grateful. Thanks, Mnation2 (talk) 05:02, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no worries. You've put in a wonderful effort on this article. Good luck, Yazan (talk) 05:22, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• In general the article meets the NPOV guidelines, but it should expand on critiques of the movement (I know there's quite a bit, especially from the far left). For example, what was the LCP's reaction to the movement after its foundation (it only mentions that Atallah was expelled)?

 Done

• (Update): Maybe you should also mention some reference to the physical address of the movement, where does it operate from? HQ?

 Done

• Comment: The statement about DLM being the first leftist party with representatives in the parliament might be a little misleading. Progressive Socialist Party of Junblatt, is also a leftist party (namely), and a member of the Socialist international. Maybe you could specify more (secular, etc.)

 Done

I am putting the article on hold for 7 days until these issues are addressed. Feel free to contact me when you feel that the issues are resolved. Happy editing. Yazan (talk) 06:20, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting the review! I've trimmed the lead a bit and moved the cedar revolution section to history for now, but will be out of town for the next few days. I should be back in time to complete the recommended changes before 7 days has passed. Thanks again, Mnation2 (talk) 19:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very well, good luck.Yazan (talk) 05:53, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'm done. =) Let the review commence! Mnation2 (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

I am glad to promote this to GA-status. You've put great work in here, and its been a pleasure reviewing it. Would love to see this happens to more articles in WP-Lebanon. Best, Yazan (talk) 16:20, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to nominate this article for a-class review. In order to promote the article, two non-involved editors must support it without any opposes. I guess I'll have to find some reviewers... Mnation2 (talk) 02:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mnation. This is a fine article and a good read. An A class is "Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting." I have listed some technical suggestions but the next big hurdle you truly face is making sure the reader is not left wanting. I read through it and at a few points I navigated away when I may not have needed to, rely on information I already had, or was left wanting. I added a few suggestions on expansion since it looks like an even broader presentation could be made with the resources available.

You have done an excellent job and I suspect getting this up to A class (or dare to dream FA) is within reach. I recommended taking this over to Wikipedia:Peer review and getting more eyes on it. It will make the article that much better and you will hopefully get the two editors needed to allow its promotion in the assessment scale upon completion. You might also find out that my suggestions below are garbage (that is OK)! I have worked on a couple GAs and don't know how much you have so I want to stress that the criticism below is what I searched for and overall I really enjoyed the article.Cptnono (talk) 10:08, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Technical issues:

• Abbreviations (WP:MOSABBR)

**Is DLM a common enough acronym to be mentioned in the first line?

 Done

**Bold HYD

 Done

**The first mention of the Lebanese Communist Party requires "Lebanese Communist Party(LCP)" since LCP is used throughout.

 Done

• Wording.
  • Miscellaneous
    • "previousley split" This would be better as "recently left" or simply "split". Did the group leave the party to form that other party or did it happen later?

The split from the LCP (in 2000) was four years prior to the founding of the DLM (2004). Mnation2 (talk) 02:26, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't like "recently split". I could be wrong, though. Any thoughts on alternatives?

• • • "all strands of leftism: "aspects" or something similar would read better than "strands"

 Done Changed to "forms"

• • • The section heading "Early history" could be simplified to "History". It realistically covers the whole thing.

 Done

• • • "The DLM operates under a decentralized framework in which distinct currents" currents has a note explaining it. Since this isn't being used as a direct quote it can be summarized and then the note will not be needed. Try replacing "current" with "internal movement"

 Done

• • There is some language that might come across in a peacock manner. It could also be looked at as good writing. Here's what jump out at me and I would like to know what you think.
  • "champions for" might be grandstanding so "Is a proponent for" might tone it down.

I was thinking about that when I wrote it. "Champions" is perhaps over-the-top. I changed it to "affirms". Mnation2 (talk) 06:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• • • a "full half". The qualifier is not needed. It is a half. "Full" also implies that it is remarkable. Going off of the principles of WP:WORDS "only, just" section "Even in cases where the value judgment being made represents a widely held view, it is still inappropriate to lead a reader to agree with that view". Since it is remarkable add a line of text describing it instead of implying it.

 Done I got rid of "a full".

• • • Wikilinks
  • I'm not going to say all of them but do a quick clean up. You don't need to mention a couple such as Beirut so several times. When you do, the first one in the paragraph should be done. Some editors go for only one an article, others do per section, and some just eyeball it. Take a look at WP:LINKS.

 Done

Beirut in the assasinations seciton is not needed IMO.

• • Civil marriage or secular marriage could be wikilinked

 Done

• • confessionism is wikilinked. Is note #4 needed?

Atallah is wikilined. Is note #1 needed?

• Image
  • Cedar Revolution image needs afair use rationale. See: Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline.
  • >It is also reccomended to not put images directly below third level section headings

 Done Moved

• • Add alt text to Samir Kassir poster

 Done

This might need to be modified slightly but I'm not an alt text expert and it is a good step

• You could actually remove the see also section since everything mentioned is Wikilinked above. See WP:SEEALSO

 Done

• Quotes
  • • I don't believe the brackets are needed with the ellipsis in the "Kassir and

Hawi assassinations" sections. "Georges Hawi [...] was" -> "Georges Hawi... was"

 Done fixed

• • Have you considered paraphrasing ""[First], we are preachers of real social and cultural change on the bases of democracy, national independence and reconciliation with the Arab nation and Arab nationalism. Second we are preachers of cultural and ideological renaissance for the sake of secularism and political and religious reforms in the Arab east... Thirdly we believe in fighting for freedom and against tyranny and oppression."" It seems bulky. Break it up in too separate quotes or sentances maybe (or maybe not).
  • You might be going against Wikipedia's manual of style which calls for "punctuation marks inside the quotation marks if they are part of the quoted material and outside if they are not." See WP:LQ

I don't think I am, but I could be wrong.

I hate the "typesetter’s rule" even though it is big in the States.

• Colour revolutons does not need to be capped within a sentence. Colour -> colour

 Done

Content issues (primary importance)

• Political stances needs to be expanded. I noticed that you used "The DLM supports prohibiting the discrimination of the disabled" The source used has so many other social justice issues that really could add to this article and I would suspect there are other sources available. This is my biggest concern with the article.
• ""Composed of 51 to 101 members, determined proportionately by the size of the constituency, it maintains political priorities, alliances, and rhetoric, and elects an Executive Committee of 9 to 15 members for daily organizational activities." What are the constituencies? what are the alliances? what are the daily organizational activities? Is there data in the form of more numbers on this?
• Sources. You relied heavily on biased sources. You used them well and the bias did not creep in which is good but I would be curious to see what else is available in more mainstream media coverage that is less concerned with the issues.

Could you please provide an example of such a source? I've used all available resources (read: diverse, ideologically tilted, obscure) to scrape together this article and am not sure such sources exist. Mnation2 (talk) 02:26, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have that many resources available in a harback published form for something like this so I always enjoy drilling through Google News Archives. Check out this or other variants. I personally have used [1] but am always happier with something from a major agency.

The Google news archive is really helpful. Thanks! Mnation2 (talk) 03:03, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Google Scholar is also fun.

• You used notes. Consider moving these into the prose if you keep them and the sources discuss both what is being noted and the subject here.

Is there some Wikipedia policy that opposes footnotes? I rather like them. Mnation2 (talk) 03:03, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes are OK but expansion of the main body might be better for this article. Keep it in mind but from an expansion standpoint.

• "The DLM actively participated in the 2005 Cedar Revolution" and "Samir Kassir, a founder of the movement, played a significant role in orchestrating the protests" More would be awesome. What happened on the ground? What was the role? Numbers? Significant instances? Views from outsiders?

 Done I beefed up this section considerably.

• Criticism section. As it is, it is OK. I personally don't like criticism sections but this does not over weight the article. However, it might be better if the prose were expanded to the point that this section could be removed completely and the individual aspects could compliment the existing or soon to come prose. For example the Ziad Majed line could be moved into the section on the March 14th or the Brooklyn Rail commentary could be moved into policies.
• Cptnono (talk) 10:08, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a ton for your input! I'm working on it... Mnation2 (talk) 02:26, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Democratic Left Movement (Lebanon). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add ((cbignore)) after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add ((nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot)) to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060812043518/http://www.dailystar.com.lb:80/elections05/north_lebanon.htm to http://www.dailystar.com.lb/elections05/north_lebanon.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:40, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Democratic Left Movement (Lebanon). 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/20081231061418/http://alyassar.org/ar/content/view/11/5/ to http://alyassar.org/ar/content/view/11/5/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081231061413/http://alyassar.org/ar/content/view/10/5/ to http://alyassar.org/ar/content/view/10/5/
• Added ((dead link)) tag to http://www2.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/research/ndp/ref/index_e.htm?docid=366&cid=0&sec=CH03
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110616212824/http://www.ifes.org/files/IFES_LebanonReview060709Results.pdf to http://www.ifes.org/files/IFES_LebanonReview060709Results.pdf

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 12:24, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Democratic Left Movement (Lebanon). 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lebanonwire.com/0410/04101806LW.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927132055/http://www.lebanonwire.com/0410/04101608LW.asp to http://www.lebanonwire.com/0410/04101608LW.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927132059/http://www.lebanonwire.com/0504/05041201AFP.asp to http://www.lebanonwire.com/0504/05041201AFP.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080207035656/http://www.alyassar.org/ to http://www.alyassar.org/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080207035656/http://www.alyassar.org/ to http://www.alyassar.org/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 20:08, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]