Talk:Conflict Intelligence Team

Conflict Intelligence Team is currently a Magazines and print journalism good article nominee. Nominated by Ktkvtsh (talk) at 18:02, 18 February 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: Russian investigative organisation

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Russia Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Journalism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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?

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.

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