Talk:Geographia Neoteriki

Geographia Neoteriki has been listed as one of the Language and literature 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 20, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 25, 2010.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that although Geographia Neoteriki, written by Grigorios Konstantas and Daniel Philippidis, was welcomed with enthusiasm by western intellectuals, it was largely neglected by Greek scholars?

Greece Low‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece 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.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 16:22, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 16:22, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Two images of the cover and a section cover provided and captioned, so the article is illustrated.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

I'm awarding this article GA-status. On the whole it is GA-compliant, but I was beginning to have some concerns over Wikipedia:Plagiarism. The sources were "acknowledged" by citation; however, they were direct quotations of parts of sentences, but were not "marked" as such by quotation marks. Please be careful.

Congratulations on producing an informative article. Pyrotec (talk) 16:48, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Geographia Neoteriki. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721112722/http://keu.btk.ppke.hu/Docs/Kontler_and_Kitromilides.pdf to http://keu.btk.ppke.hu/Docs/Kontler_and_Kitromilides.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:20, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]