# Talk:Timeline of the Egyptian revolution of 2011

This timeline could use an overview of the lead-up to the protests, including Bouazizi and Tunisia, Khaled Said, Asmaa Mahfouz, and the various organizations which planned the event.  It can probably just be pulled from pieces of 2011_Egyptian_revolution#Background and 2011_Egyptian_revolution#Lead-up_to_the_protests. Ocaasi c 20:36, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, It took me forever to reply. I dont think we need to add anything from the background seeing how the article talks mainly about the event that happened under Mubarak's rule (From the 25th of Jan until the 11 of Feb.). The only thing I think needs to be added from the 2011_Egyptian_revolution#Lead-up_to_the_protests is part of National Police Day protests section like we talked about before. If we fixed that issue, I think we might be able to get to GA/FA standard in no time. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 08:55, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Timeline of the 2011 Egyptian revolution under Hosni Mubarak's rule/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Amadscientist (talk · contribs) 04:39, 19 April 2012 (UTC)


### Criteria
Before conducting an extensive review, and after ensuring you are viewing an unvandalized version, check the article and its edit history for the following basic problems which are sometimes found in GA nominations.

The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability. Done
The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Done
There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including {{cleanup}}, {{wikify}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{fact}}, {{citation needed}}, {{clarifyme}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}.) Done
The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars. Done
The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint. Done


### Review
Well-written:

Verifiable with no original research:

Broad in its coverage:

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:


#### Result