I am nominating this for featured article because I think it reach gfeatured article criteria. It is well organized, illustrated and referenced.Vojvodaeist 08:42, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Note - Has VVVladimir (talk·contribs) been told about this nomination? Apart from adding a category, the nominator does not seem to have made any edits to this article. Graham ColmTalk 09:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I didn't work on this article but I can answer if you have some question or comment (or to improve some section).--Vojvodaeist 15:38, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to let this run only because none of the significant contributors have been active on Wiki recently. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:56, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Comment - From what I see, this appears to be a translation of a featured article from the Serbian Wikipedia. Although at least one sentence have been taken directly from the English source cited:
In a situation reminiscent of earlier Serbian rulers, he is pressed by Bulgarian expansion, while being courted by the Byzantine emperor.
From a quick check of the sources, I could not see how Note 3. supports the facts given, although the book is by the respected historian Vladimir Ćorović. The article requires further copy-editing from a native English speaker, and I think the best way to proceed is Peer Review. Graham ColmTalk 17:31, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Do you suggest to add some more precise reference?--Vojvodae 19:46, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Not necessarily, I can only read Russian, so I might have missed the salient points. In general sources in English are preferred—but are not mandatory. You could explain here how the sources supports the statements. Graham ColmTalk 19:56, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
I put link to specific chapter in electronic edition of Ćorović's history. The point is that territory of Jovan Vladimir's state was previously part of the Časlav Klonimirović's state. After Časlav death his country was divided in several parts and, in one of them, Jovan Vladimir rise to power. (8th chapter from the top).--Vojvodaeplease be free to write :) 05:41, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Oppose—Needs a thorough independent copy-edit. Here are examples from only the lead. The whole text needs work.
So if you've got a link to the Eastern Orthodox "May 22", why is the item linked to the standard May 22? How does that pass the relevance test that is now—after overwhelming community support—stated at MOSNUM? Same for "1016", which is a threadbare collection of factoids that seem to have little to do with this topic; if any of them does have relevance, why not include it in the main text?
"fell in love with the captive"—oh, I get a bit wobbly when I see a reference to oxytocin levels in the guy's brain at a certain time. How could we ever trust the evidence WRT something so subjective and vulnerable to cross-cultural distortion? Will you consider weakening the claim? ("may have") or otherwise recasting?
"finally"—yep, being beheaded sounds pretty final to me. Do we need "finally"?
Jovan Vladimir was buried in Prespa, and shortly after his death he was recognized as a martyr and saint, and is celebrated on May 22; he is the first Serbian saint. Two or three years after the burial he was reburied in Duklja, but in ca. 1215 his remains were ..."—spot the triple redundancy somewhere after the first comma. There are quite a few problems here: "Jovan Vladimir was buried in Prespa, and shortly after was recognized as a martyr and the first Serbian saint, his sainthood celebrated on May 22;. Two or three years later he was reburied in Duklja, but in about 1215 his remains were ...".
Is his "feast day" this day of celebration already mentioned? Please make it clear to those who aren't familiar, even if it seems obvious to you.
Are his remains a "relic"? Unsure. And "of the saint" would be neater, if it's not obvious from the context already.
"cross that"—you could dispense with "that".
Comma after "hand" could go for greater smoothness?Tony(talk) 16:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Corrected per Tony's suggestions. As for the whole text, fresh eyes would be very welcome to copy-edit it for smooth running - especially an expert in editing like Tony. VVVladimir (talk) 18:12, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
I am happy to see other opinions. I will fix all these problems in next few days. I also ask for one help: can somenative english speaker read article and fix language mistakes? I also plan to put some more reliable sources (printed especially).--Vojvodaeplease be free to write :) 15:42, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
The first link is used as a reference for some well-known and undisputed historical facts. It can be easily replaced by book(s) of prominent historians, if needed. The second link is a translation of a part of Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja. So the text on that page is not a historical work in itself - it is just a translation of that historical document relevant for Jovan Vladimir. There is no reason to dispute the correctness of that translation. The third link is on the site of the Russian Orthodox Church in England, and it is used as a reference for a religious title of St. J. Vladimir, not for any historical facts. The fourth link is of a prominent expert for Albania, and is used as a reference for the facts in the article connected with Albania. The text on the fifth link cites the aforementioned chronicle and John V A Fine Jr., a prominent historian of medieval Balkans. VVVladimir (talk) 18:12, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - reluctantly. This is an interesting and engaging article that has been on my mind for a week or so. Sadly problems still remain; it needs a thorough copy-edit and more citations. There are too many statements that lack attribution to reliable sources. I do not think that Ealdgyth's concerns have been adequately addressed. Graham ColmTalk 22:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.