Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Stamata Revithi/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Stamata Revithi edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Some decades ago Revithi was almost unknown. During the resurgence of feminism and the revitalization of women's role in modern society, she was treated as a symbol. A poor woman from Syros, who would never imagine she would become the theme of a Wikipedia article some 100+ years later! With very few existing sources, it was a temptation for me to create a nice and attractive article for "Melpomene" (if she is indeed the runner "Melpomene"!). User:H1nkles provided me with some excellent feedback in the article's talk page. More ideas and suggestions are expected, taking always into consideration the scarcity of relevant sources. My intention is to bring this article first to GA and then to FA status. Thank you all in advance,Yannismarou (talk) 18:11, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by karanacs edit

  • The article offers every detail available on her life, and I think that the article you say was not promoted for a series of reasons.--Yannismarou (talk) 18:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think there needs to be a bit more background information about the Olympics. The article goes straight from describing her life as it existed in 1896 to talking about someone encouraging her to run a marathon in the Olympics. It is probably notable to mention here that it was the first modern Olympics, which was likely a big deal in Greece.
  • Other details might also be interesting:
    • How far was it to walk from where she was living to Athens?
    • Why would someone expect that winning the marathon would get her a job?
  • Tried to give some explanation, and make clear that not all historians agree on her motives.--Yannismarou (talk) 16:56, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Might also want to explain to people unfamiliar with the sport what a marathon is. (how long a race)
  • I think that this is already told in the lead: "marathon course of 42 ki". I don't think that definitions like the one in the marathon article ("is a long-distance foot race with an official distance of 42.195 kilometers") add anything to the reader's proper understanding.--Yannismarou (talk) 19:30, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Any information on what the rules were for registering for the competition? Would it have been common to just show up? Were there rules as there are today about previous qualification or only X number of athletes from each country?
  • The rules of the 1896 Games are obscure, but yes two previous qualification races had taken place for the selection of Greek athletes.--Yannismarou (talk) 16:56, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any quotes on what she responded that marked her as "quick-witted"? That might be a touch of humor to add.
  • "but the real problem was her gender" - did the committee ever say that? If not, then this should likely be attributed to a historian, book, or article.
  • Any information on why she did not take part in the race with the American women?
  • The lead mentions that she was not allowed to enter the stadium. This is not mentioned in the article.
  • There is a disconnect between the statement that a woman was clocked in the marathon in 1926 and that the first race was in 1984. This does not make sense to me
  • This was the first official recognized timing of any woman running a marathon. But the first Olympic marathon race by women took place 1984. I thought it was already clear, but I tried to further clarify it.--Yannismarou (talk) 19:24, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because there are so many notes mixed in with the citations, I'd recommend taking advantage of the new ref group="Note" syntax. That will allow you to separate out the notes from the sources so that people can see which is which.
  • The last image needs to make it clear that this is a painting of the muse, not of the woman referred to in the article by that name.

Karanacs (talk) 21:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from SG edit

I'm sorry for the delay, Yannis; I've been really swamped. I lost my entire review to a Wikimedia Foundation error, so I hope I get everything this second time through. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • We glean in the lead that women weren't allowed to participate, but we're not explicitly told that. Can it be clarified outright, so we're not left guessing?
Better?--Yannismarou (talk) 19:21, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • How about the length of the race in the lead (with the conversions); it's never explicitly stated.
Done.--Yannismarou (talk) 19:14, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the section heading "1896 marathon race" redundant, could it be just "1896 marathon"?
Done.--Yannismarou (talk) 18:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is Martin–Gynn joined in the citations when they are listed as two people in the References ?
What is the proper writing. Martin and Gynn, Martin & Gynn or something else?--Yannismarou (talk) 19:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The citations are very clean; I only see one thing. Publication dates are unlinked, while accessdates are linked. You can delinks accessdates by switching from the paramater accessdate to the parameters accessmonthday and accessyear (or accessdaymonth and accessyear for articles that use international date format).
I think they are somehow fixed by themselves!--Yannismarou (talk) 17:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Which reminds me, should this article use international date formatting rather than US date formatting?
Which is the international date formatting?!--Yannismarou (talk) 18:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice, clean article! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both of you. I'll soon work on your suggestions, but for the time being I am a bit off Wikipedia. I felt I needed some time to clean my mind, and come back soon. What's sure is that your suggestions are definitely taken into serious consideration.--Yannismarou (talk) 18:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Stamata_Revithi/archive1&oldid=1078793616"