Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Michael the Brave
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I worked quite a lot at this article and think it is ready now for promotion. However, there might be few minor issues to be fixed (copyediting, etc), but i'm ready to take care of them. --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 14:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the article does indeed need a bit of copyediting; I made some very minor changes to the introduction, but left the rest alone. I'd be happy to do the copyediting if you'd like, but I thought you might prefer to not have other hands dabbling in your work. Anyway, yeah, there are a few things here and there, like in the Early Life section, where it says "Michael's political career was quite spectacular, he became the Ban of Mehedinţi..." It sounds piddling, but I think that comma after "spectacular" really needs to be a period or a semicolon, since "Michael's political career was quite spectacular" is a full sentence unto itself, both grammatically and in meaning. There's a point somewhere later where it says "allied" instead of "allies"; a simple typo I'm sure. ... Clean these things up, and the few other tiny mistakes scattered through the article, tighten up the phrasing here and there, and I'll definitely give my vote to Support the upgrade. Excellent work, my friend. LordAmeth (talk) 21:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I changed a bit the sentence mentioned by you, but i'm not really sure if it's ok now. As for that "allied" point, I couldn't find it, can you still see it? Or perhaps it was corrected until now...? --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 13:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Cheers, would there be anything else? --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 12:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Could you request that someone copyedit it for you? I did a little, but it looks like it's going to need a thorough going-over by someone perhaps a little familiar with the topic. Also, although eight references are listed, only one of them is really used for the article. Are the other references unavailable, or don't contain much useful information? Cla68 (talk) 02:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually I asked several editors to help me with this article, but unfortunately I didn't receive any help. See - 1, 2 and 3. Regarding the refs, actually 7 of them are used in the article. Giurescu is the most widely used because it's the best one. --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 13:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I would really appreciate some more comments in this review... --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 16:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.