Talk:Manuel Erotikos Komnenos/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Caponer (talk · contribs) 23:08, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cplakidas, I will begin a thorough and comprehensive review and re-review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments in the meantime. Thanks! -- Caponer (talk) 23:08, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Cplakidas, I've completed my thorough and comprehensive review and re-review of your article and find that it meets GA criteria, but I do have a few comments that should be addressed prior to its passage. Thanks again for another great article! -- Caponer (talk) 14:12, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, 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):
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 fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Lede

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article should adequately defines Komnenos, establish the necessary context for Komnenos, and explain why Komnenos is notable. Therefore, I suggest significantly increasing the size of the lede so that it is a more comprehensive summary of the article's contents. Briefly describe his obscure origins, followed by mention of his leadership of the defence of Nicaea against the rebel general Bardas Skleros. It may also be notable to mention briefly that Manuel later served as an envoy to Skleros. I'll defer to you as to what other content you decide to include, but the lede will most certainly have to be expanded prior to passage to Good Article status.
The template is properly formatted and its content is cited within the article's prose.
The lede is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

Biography

~~I suggest listing the inline citations in numerical order.~~
Since the article is Komnenos's biography, would it be possible to split the article up into sections rather than have it be just one section entitled Biography? What about dividing the Biography section into "Origins," "Military career"/"Military pursuits"/"Military service," and "Later life and family" which wold fold the last paragraph into the Family section for a more robust section. These are merely suggestions, but please consider.
- I considered that, but there is so little information that the sections don't really make sense. The article is structured thematically already within the "Biography" heading, so the essence of your suggestion is already covered.
~~I recommend prefacing the region as the Armenian region of Vaspurakan to provide context.~~
This section is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no further comments or questions for this section.

Family

This section is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no further comments or questions for this section. Please see note above regarding a possible merge with the last paragraph of the Biography section.
- Again, I considered this, but this still belongs properly to Manuel's life and actions, so I left it there. I tried to keep the Family section as plain as possible, with just enough info to provide context and the most important info on his wife and children for anyone who would not wish to check on the main articles.

Thanks for the review and the suggestions! I was a bit afraid on account of the article's brevity, but it really covers everything there is to say on Manuel, and as the progenitor of the Byzantine analogue to the Habsburgs, he is a rather special figure. Constantine ✍ 14:54, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Constantine, I've completed my re-review of the article following your edits and find that it is ready to pass to Good Article status. Congratulations on another job well done! -- Caponer (talk) 15:11, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. FYI, I plan on gradually writing up the entire Komnenian clan to GA status, so there will be much follow-up on this one! Cheers, Constantine ✍ 15:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]