Talk:Harbor of Eutropius/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 16:57, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to this in the next few days. Ealdgyth (talk) 16:57, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Lead:
- "and served an unknown function. The harbor served as the execution site of Emperor Maurice" can we vary the second "served" here... perhaps "The harbor was the location for the execution of Emperor Maurice"?
  Done.
- "the harbor was on of the landing grounds" I think you mean "the harbor was one of the landing grounds"?
  Done.
History:
- "along the coast of Asia Minor, possessed by the Byzantine Empire." this is ... awkward. Do you mean "along the coast of Asia Minor in lands possessed by the Byzantine Empire."?\
  Done.
- Do we really need some of the detail about the bridging attempts?
  I feel like it places it in the important context, but I am not opposed to some trimming. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:05, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  See if my trim works? Alternatively, we could put the details I cut into an explanatory footnote if you want to keep it. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- "The Harbor of Eutropius was the least important of the three, behind the Chalcedon, Chrysopolis, and Hieria harbors." If there were Chalcedon, Chrysopolis, Hieria, and Eutropius harbors - that makes four harbors, not three, right?
  Just because I have a degree in accounting doesn't make me good at counting... Fixed. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:05, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  I feel you - first husband was a grad student in math when we met, and the man couldn't even keep a checkbook balanced... why the medievalist was the one in our relationship who understood budgets and such, I will never understand... Ealdgyth (talk) 15:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  He learned that there are only so many days you can go without paying the soldiers before they start thinking your head looks real good on a spike, I suppose. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No images so that's set
I randomly googled three phrases and only turned up Wikipedia mirrors. Earwig's tool shows no sign of copyright violation.
Spot check:
- "but was named for the district in which it was located; however, some sources incorrectly report that it was built under either Emperors Zeno (r. 474–475, 476–491) and Anastasius I Dicorus (r. 491–518), or Constantine the Great (r. 306–337)." is sourced to this source which supports the information

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:57, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ealdgyth: Done or responded to all. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:05, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Check my trim attempt? Ealdgyth (talk) 15:13, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ealdgyth: Looks good, I did add a bit of an explanation about the allegendess of the second attempt. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LOoks good, passing this now Ealdgyth (talk) 15:39, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]