The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 20:57, 17 July 2007.

---

Chad[edit]

I've started a radical remake of this article since April, spurred mostly by Amcaja's example, raising Cameroon to a featured article. After completing in May the first draft of the article, I submitted it to a peer review, where I've been much helped by Brian, that apart from carefully peer reviewing the article has much helped me with copyediting. As will be noted, a number of red links are present in the article; I intend to progressively remove them, as part of my ongoing project of expanding covering of Chad-related topics.--Aldux 00:03, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Very good. Just some notes I made while reading (mostly link suggestions):

• "Sahelian" should be linked when first used in the lead rather than linking it further on in the second paragraph.
• Wikilink "hegemony" and "subsistence" in the lead.
• Wikilink "California".
• Wikilink "piracy".
• The sentence beginning "Although in the 21st century" seems a bit awkward. Also, isn't the Lake Chad thing quite a big problem? I recall reading somewhere in the news about this. I think a few more details about the lake could be added.
• During what part of the year is the wet season?
• Wikilink "parastatal".
• Wikilink "football" and the other sports in that line. --- RockMFR 01:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I disagree with the extra linking. I can see "subsistence agriculture" and "parastatal" getting links, but links to things like "California" and "hegemony" just strike me as frivolous. We need to try to only make links that will further the reader's understanding of Chad when they click through; I don't think the California article or article on soccer will do that. — Amcaja (talk) 01:27, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree with Brian, we should avoid exceeding with links.--Aldux 21:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The peer review should not be open.--Rmky87 02:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Mild oppose, mainly on style issues. Content-wise, the article is excellent.
  • The sentence "It became clear that behind the apparent return to normality was an air of tension." doesn't add any content to the article not made concrete in the following sentence. I recommend removal.
    • Already removed by Brian.--Aldux 21:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the sentence "In 2005, opposition parties and human rights organizations boycotted the constitutional referendum", I don't understand how human rights organizations boycott a referendum.
    • The wording is almost exactly that used by Amnesty International in its report; but if you find it awkard we could put, instead of "boycotted", "supported the boycott".--Aldux 21:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • In "analysts such as Michael Weinstein have argued that this new cycle of instability will probably culminate in regime change", there is no explanation of who Weinstein is and why we should believe him. Also, "analysts such as" implies that there are other analysts, but there is only one reference. This is possible weasel wording.
    • I've included this opinion because it has been voiced by quite a number of analysts and observers. But it's not really vital, so I'll just remove it.--Aldux 21:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

      The option is to add references to the other observers, but removing it also solves the problem. - BanyanTree 05:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • In the paragraph about the wet and dry seasons, please add the rough months of the seasons, rather than referring to them as "brief" and "longer".
    • Unfortunately, as I said during the peer review, this is quite difficult. To make clearer what I mean, I'll quote from Samuel Decalo's Historical dictionary of Chad: "within Chad there are wide climatic variations ... In the wet tropical South ... up to 48 inches of rain fall annually during the May-October wet season; in the Sahelian belt rainfalls rarely exceeded 12 to 31 inches (between June and September)." As for the Saharan zone, rainfall hardly comes at all. So it's hard to put a sole duration; I've placed, as Decalo does, both Sahel and Sudan wet season durations. Is it OK?--Aldux 21:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

      Yes, that's great. - BanyanTree 05:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is a minor point, but is FGM is confined to particular ethnic groups? If so, I think that would be interesting enough for half a sentence in the relevant paragraph.
    • Well, I can't say it's really confined to specific groups, as it involves 45% of female population, but some groups practice it more than others. From the USA country report on human rights practices: "The highest rates of FGM--90 percent or more--were among Arabs, Hadjarai, and Ouaddai. Lower percentages were reported among the Sara (38 percent) and Gorane (2 percent). According to the survey, 70 percent of Muslim females and 30 percent of Christian females were subjected to FGM. The practice was prevalent especially among ethnic groups in the east and south." It's not easy to put it briefly, but if you feel it could be needed, I could put the first sentence: "The highest rates (90 percent or more) were among Arabs, Hadjarai, and Ouaddai. Lower percentages were reported among the Sara (38 percent) and Toubou (2 percent)."--Aldux 21:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

      I find it relevant, especially at it affects a fourth of Chadians. I would prefer it to be included. Looking at that paragraph again, you may be able to drop "Discrimination against women is widespread." as redundant to the specific examples in the paragraph that illustrate the idea. - BanyanTree 05:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Followed your suggestions. Do you think it's ok now?--Aldux 13:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do think that the paragraph is better than it was before. -BanyanTree 20:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • In "Due to its great variety of peoples and languages, Chad possesses a rich cultural heritage. For example, the Chadian government have actively promoted Chadian culture and national traditions by opening the Chad National Museum and the Chad Cultural Centre." the second sentence doesn't follow from the first.
    • They aren't connected anymore.--Aldux 22:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Chadians enjoy listening to music, both traditional and modern." is too general to be useful. Another awkward sentence is "Specific ethnic groups make use of characteristic instruments". Please reword these.
    • Well, I gave a try at making it less awkard.--Aldux 22:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

      If one replaced "Chad" with any country in the world, the sentence would still be true. It's largely a filler sentence intended to transition topics and not a big deal, but I'm hoping a more interesting, specific statement can be substituted. - BanyanTree 05:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed "Chadians enjoy listening to music, both traditional and modern.", because too general.--Aldux 13:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • In "Fish is popular, especially as salanga, a form of small dried fish, or banda, larger smoked fish," it is somewhat unclear to me if salanga or banda are the names of specific fish (such as Kapenta), as well as types of dish preparation.
    • The Salanga is a specific fish (like Kapenta) of the family of the Alestiidae. To quote from a FAO paper: "About 100 000 tons of fish are caught annually which are prepared either as “salanga” (sun-dried and lightly smoked Alestes and Hydrocynus) or as “banda” (smoked larger fish). “Banda” is mainly sold in Nigeria and “salanga” in Cameroon and Chad."[1] Edited it a bit, hopefully it's ok now.--Aldux 22:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

      Interesting. I love specifics. - BanyanTree 05:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Footnotes to online news articles and reports should include a link to the source article as well as a date of publication.
    • I must admit that I miss what you exactly mean here; if you intend that the footnotes should be linked, I have to object, because it would be a useless duplication, as all sources are already in the "references" section, and there they are all linked and provided with the dates.--Aldux 22:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

      Ah, yes. I missed that as it's not the way I write, but it's not objectionable. - BanyanTree 05:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • - BanyanTree 08:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Remaining items not worth objecting to the article as a whole. Nicely done, covering all the topics one would expect, and a few I didn't. Changed to support. - BanyanTree 05:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC) 20:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I went ahead and gave the article another light copy edit (I copy edited once already during peer review). I've acted upon those of BanyanTree's concerns that I could, but Aldux will have to address the others. I have a few more comments about where I think the article needs a bit more spit and polish:
  • The size of Chad is compared to the U.S. state of California and to Niger. Is there a non-African country to which its size is comparable? I'm not sure if there's a rule for this, but it might be more instructive to compare it to, say, Saudi Arabia or Kazakhsatan than to its neighbor to the west.
    • I went ahead and changed the comparison to Peru. — Amcaja (talk) 13:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second paragraph under "Demographics" gives some population density figures in metric units; the English equivalents need to follow in parentheses.

• Done.--Aldux 23:04, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • I'm not sure about this one, but I think the "(French)" marker for French-language sources is supposed to come after the reference, not before it.

• I too may be wrong, but as a rule I've generally seen the language marker placed before; but to tell it all, by a rapid look at the links to the language template both possibilities are widely used.--Aldux 23:04, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll happily support once these issues are cleared up or explained away. — Amcaja (talk) 13:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Support now. Good work! In full disclosure, I peer reviewed the article and copy edited it, but I have otherwise not been involved. — Amcaja (talk) 23:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Looks good to me. I can't see any major obstacles in the article to FA status.-h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 15:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Just a minor comment, shouldn't the "Notes" section be above "References"? --Victor12 16:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, and sorry for the late awnser. Personally I've seen both way being vastly used, but I must admit preferring the notes at the end, especially since the full name of the sources are in the references section. But this is not very important, really, so if the other editors prefer to change the order I can modify it.--Aldux 00:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Also, the lead looks unbalanced wiht 2 out of 3 paragraphs devoted entirely to the History of Chad. Thus, it doesn't seem to correctly summarize the entire article. --Victor12 18:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • On the contrary, there's one paragraph on history, and one paragraph on current events. Not at all unbalanced. — Amcaja (talk) 22:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Dropping back into this discussion, my first impression was that the lead was excessively historical (i.e. a recounting of mainly political events) as well, especially in light of Wikipedia:Lead section. As it appears to be a standard way of writing country leads, I didn't object. However, I would also prefer a shorter, less history-focused lead, though I won't object on this basis. - BanyanTree 23:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Check for instance the lead in Cameroon: 1 paragraph Geography + Linguistics, 1 paragraph History, 1 paragraph Economy + Politics and Government; whereas in Chad we have 1 paragraph Geography + Linguistics, 1 paragraph History (7000BC - 1990) and 1 paragraph History because most of the facts discussed in this third paragraph are detailed in the History section. Thus, the lead seems quite unbalanced. --Victor12 23:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I view the leads a bit differently. In Cameroon's lead, we've got 1 paragraph Geography + Linguistics, 1 paragraph History, and 1 paragraph Economy, Politics and Government, and Current Events. (The only difference between my breakdown and yours is the current events in mine). Chad has 1 paragraph Geography and Linguistics, 1 paragraph History, and 1 paragraph Politics and Current Events. The items you are claiming are history in the third paragraph mirror similar elements in the Cameroon lead. Perhaps the Chad lead should be expanded by two sentences, one on culture in the lead paragraph and one on economy in the third? — Amcaja (talk) 05:57, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm, the problem I think is that the lead has too much details about Chad's "History" and "Current Events" (which come from from the History section!). In contrast issues such as Economy, Government and Culture are barely given 1 sentence. Some (even "major") trimming is needed for the History and Current events paragraphs and other topics should be expanded. --Victor12 11:58, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm a bit puzzled, especially for the model you propose: I don't have actually to check it, because in making this lead I actually had the Cameroon lead directly under my eye, and modelled the Chad lead directly on Cameroon's. Personally, I tend to agree with BT, and prefer shorter leads. I'll try to rewrite and trim, but I do feel that a paragraph should be bevoted to history, as is generally done with country articles.--Aldux 00:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't see how do we disagree. I also think there should be one History paragraph as in other countries pages. The problem with this lead is that it had two paragraphs (out of three) mostly devoted to topics covered in the History section. I see that you're working on this issue now. Good luck, --Victor12 01:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Ok, I've trimmed history to the minimum possible (less than that it would risk becoming impossible to understand, I'm afraid), and removed constitution note, but left Darfur (when the press speaks of Chad, it's generally in relation to the Darfur crisis). Expanded economy, and also added a note the Islam is the main religion. What do you think?--Aldux 01:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Looks good now. Perhaps the first mention of BC could be wikilinked as well as the word "coups d’etat". --Victor12 02:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Fixes needed - structure and prose looks good on first glance, though I'm picking up a few things which I'll highlight below: cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

.. rely on the dregs of the French civil service. - "dregs" I'd argue is a colloquial word I'm finding it hard to justify in an encyclopedic article. It also comes across as a bit POV - by whose definition or reports is this?

• • It is harsh, but it reflects the mainstream opinion. See T. Collelo, Chad: A country study: "Although France had put forth considerable effort during the conquest of Chad, the ensuing administration of the territory was halfhearted. Officials in the French colonial service resisted assignments to Chad, so posts often went to novices or to out-of- favor officials. One historian of France's empire has concluded that it was almost impossible to be too demented or depraved to be considered unfit for duty in Chad. Still, major scandals occurred periodically, and many of the posts remained vacant. In 1928, for example, 42 percent of the Chadian subdivisions lacked official administrators." And also see S. Decalo, Historical Dictionary of Chad: "Chad was very much neglected once it was finally conquered, especially since administrative appointments to the AEF in general (and Chad in particular) were the least attractive and/or desirable posings that were frequently assigned either to novice colonial administrators or to derelict officials as a sign of demotion and/or punishment. Many of those posted to the AEF were the dregs of the French colonial civil service". And trust me, especially Decalo is probably the most important reference work on Chad.--Aldux 17:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Habré consolidated his dictatorship through a power system that relied on corruption and violence... - a fairly strong statement (though I'd hazard a guess true) - I'd maybe want a ref for it as well as the one at the end of the para which I guess refers to the whole lot.

• • Yes, as you correctly guessed, Nolutshungu's Limits of Anarchy is the source of the passage. I've added a couple of sources; there is no paucity of them on the topic, as the present attempts to bring Habré to justice have restored some notability to him on the press and human rights organizations.--Aldux 22:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...began in Chad in 2003, bringing with it hopes that Chad would at last know some tranquillity - bolded bit is awkward. rephrasing may help but nothing springs to mind - "chances of peace with prosperity?"

• • Done.--Aldux 17:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chad's greatest outside influence - "Chad's greatest foreign influence" better

• • Done.--Aldux 17:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, very nearly there. I was a bit concerned about the use of 'corrupt' in hte lead but it seems justified. I'm wondering whether a little expansion on how it is so corrupt may be warranted next to the finding in the body of the article as it is a pretty bold statement.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per previous comments about the lead. CG 11:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, very high quality, featured article recognition would be fitting. Picaroon (Talk) 04:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - seems very comprehensive --Hadseys 16:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, looks great. —Nightstallion 12:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.