Talk:Checheyigen

Checheyigen has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: October 21, 2024. (Reviewed version).

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Women's History

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Mongols: Mongol Empire Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mongols, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mongol culture, history, language, and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MongolsWikipedia:WikiProject MongolsTemplate:WikiProject MongolsMongols articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Mongol Empire task force.

Women in Green: Around the World in 31 Days

This article was created or improved during the Around the World in 31 Days GA edit-a-thon hosted by the Women in Green project in October 2024. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in GreenWikipedia:WikiProject Women in GreenTemplate:WikiProject Women in GreenWomen in Green articles

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by LunaEclipse talk 17:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that Checheyigen's political acumen ensured that her family became one of the most powerful in the Mongol Empire?

Source: Broadbridge 2018, pp. 240–241

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/HMNZS Manawanui (2019)

5x expanded by AirshipJungleman29 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 22 past nominations.

~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:37, 19 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Hook fact checks out and is cited in-article. Article is eligible and in good shape all around, and I can see no evidence of copyvio. QPQ also checks out. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:26, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 23:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 15:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to get to this one soon! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 15:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Preliminary stuff: Image is good and CC-licensed (and has alt-text, yay!) It's also stable, and none of the quickfail criteria apply. Moving on...

Text:

excellent is a bit puffy and I feel unhelpful - since it could be interpreted as particularly enjoyable marriages. I know you're getting at strategic marriages, so that might be better to use here.
- Changed to "advantageous".
  - Nice. - G
Wouldn't the big parenthetical statement work better as an EFN here? Not necessary obvs
- Done.
It might be good to explicitly state that the year of her death is unknown in the later life section.
- Annoyingly, no source actually says that. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Argh, always a shame. Well, nothing you can do there - G

Overall very good, broad coverage of a fairly obscure figure. Source review to come.

Checked Broadbridge 2016, May 2018, Broadbridge 2018, and Dunnell 2023. No discrepancies I can find, and it seems to cover these sources quite well. I couldn't find any other good sources on her, so I assume you did your research! Looks good to me. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:08, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.