Talk:Hellenic Nomarchy/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 11:24, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:29, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:29, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The impact of of ideas of the French Revolution (1789) provided a major stimulus for the further development of republican thought in Greek culture. "of of"? The use of the word "further" implies that there was already "republican thought in Greek culture". Apart form the fact that this is very badly phrased, it needs explanation. Done

   Moreover, the outbreak of the French Revolutionary ideas (1789) provided a major stimulus for the further development of republican thought in Greek culture. is only marginally better. "the outbreak of the French Revolutionary ideas" - ideas don't "outbreak". Have another go. Done

   Feraios' execution in 1798 at the hands of the Ottomans gave to this political idea an aura of heroism, which also visualized the liberation of Greece in the context of the political reforms. What idea is this? Done

   In addition to Feraios' writings, an additional number of works engendered in the same polemical style took on a more specific revolutionary character, as social contradictions in the Ottoman Empire grew sharper "works engendered in the same polemical style" This is both unclear and poor prose. Use plain English. No-one is impressed by over elaborate language, especially when it is misused. Done

   Rigas' martyrdom in 1798 gave to this political ideas an aura of heroism, which visualized the liberation of Greece in the context of the political reforms that were revolutionizing the political map of Europe. We generally use surnames in Wikipedia, not given names. The phrasing of this is clumsy and confusing. Still clumsy and badly written

   Apart from Rigas, an additional number of works engandered this style of polemical writing that took on a more and more specifically insurrectionary character, as social contraditions in Ottoman Empire grew sharper in the tumultuous era of Napoleonic Europe. Another clusmy and badly expressed phrase.

   Actually, this is very badly written and clearly fails criterion #1. Please get it copy-edited by someone with a good command of plain clear english. The WP:Guild of copyeditors may be able to help. When it has been copy-edited I will examine the prose and the lead further.

   There have been a few small improvements but this is still far from "reasonably good prose" throughout. I think you need to get assistance from another editor.

   Still needs a lot of work to render this into plain English. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:01, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

   I made a number of minor copy-edits. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:35, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Well referenced, sources appear to be RS, no evidence of OR.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Sufficient detail without trivia.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Captioned, licensed, tagged.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for seven days. The article needs copy-editing as at the moment the prose is ungrammatical, confusing and incoherent. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

   A long way to go. Please get some help, perhaps try at the project talk pages. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:04, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

   OK, I think this passesmuster now. Listing as GA, congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 19:35, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I gave the article a thorough copyedit, let me know if you find it sufficient or if more is needed. Athenean (talk) 00:22, 9 March 2011 (UTC)