Open main menu
July 28, 2019WikiProject A-class reviewApproved

Citation warringEdit

Could we please stop this? And the article already has enough sources. There is no reason to cram references into the infobox, the infobox is there to summarize the article, and whatever numbers or data are given there should be referenced in the article. Currently there are almost as many refs for the infobox as for the main article, and having four-five refs for a simple number is simply absurd. One or two high-quality sources suffice. Constantine 06:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

GA ReviewEdit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Settepozzi/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 20:40, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Constantine. I have done some copy editing. Could you flag up anything you're not happy with. Also:

  • "both Venice and Genoa remained rather passive" A little wishy washy. Lose the "rather"? Or rephrase to be more precise?
  • "awaited political developments in the West" I don't think that West should be upper case. I don't think that this will mean much to most readers. Maybe replace "West" with 'Italy'?
  • "the deposition of the autocratic Captain of the People" As "deposition" has several meanings it may be clearer to replace it with 'removal', or similar.
  • "assumption of power by a collective leadership from among the noble houses" Optional: I think that this may be clearer 'assumption of power by a collective leadership representing the noble houses'.
  • "Genoese fleet of 38 or 39 galleys and 10 saette,[a] comprising some 6,000 men" A fleet comprises its component ships. The 6,000 men will be crew, or marines, or something else, but you can't use "comprising".
  • Sources. Do you have publisher locations for the two books containing the Dotson articles?
  • Images. Any chance of an image of a galley of (approximately) this period, to give a reader an idea of what it was all about? Ha! The one from Battle of Trapani would do nicely.

Classy work. You planning on pushing this one further?

Gog the Mild (talk) 20:57, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Gog the Mild, good suggestions as usual, done. I am certainly going to nominate this for ACR, but am not so sure whether it has the wherewithal for FA (that's the curse with many Byzantine articles, there is so little info on the subject that going through the hassle of a full FAR is rather pointless both for me and for the reviewers). I do plan to eventually get all the articles on the War of Saint Sabas to A-class and above, though, and perhaps have a featured topic or something like this. Constantine 21:42, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
And done. Possibly the easiest GAN I have assessed. Let me know when it goes for ACR. And if you fancy doing one (or more!) of mine I currently have seven unloved GANs to choose from. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:51, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose ( ) 1b. MoS ( ) 2a. ref layout ( ) 2b. cites WP:RS ( ) 2c. no WP:OR ( ) 3a. broadness ( )
3b. focus ( ) 4. neutral ( ) 5. stable ( ) 6a. free or tagged images ( ) 6b. pics relevant ( )
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked   are unassessed

Return to "Battle of Settepozzi" page.