Talk:Marianos Argyros/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: West Virginian (talk · contribs) 10:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cplakidas, I will be engaging in 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 concerns in the meantime. -- West Virginian (talk) 10:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Cplakidas, you've written another phenomenal and comprehensive article illustrating the biography of a notable Byzantine person. This article meets all the criteria for Good Article status, but I just had a few comments and concerns below that must first be addressed prior to its passage to Good Article status. Thanks again! -- West Virginian (talk) 18:35, 3 September 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 and overall

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article stands alone as a concise overview and summary of the article. The lede defines Argyros, establishes context for Argyros, explains why Argyros is notable, and summarizes the most important points of Argyros' life.
There may be enough information here for an Template:Infobox person template. I know you've probably already weighed this decision, but I wanted to ensure that I shared this suggestion.
Rather than say that "he renounced the monastery...", would it be more correct render it as such: "he renounced monasticism..."?
Since there are two different forms of "taking over" in the lede, I would modify one of the usages. Consider a similar wording to: "In 963, he opposed the takeover of the imperial throne by Nikephoros Phokas by assuming control of Constantinople and arresting his father, Bardas Phokas the Elder." You could also say that he opposed the "usurpation" of the imperial throne, although I grant you it adds a few too many syllables. These are just suggestions.
The lede is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this section.
The image of the gold solidus of Romanos I with Constantine VII is licensed CC BY-SA 2.5 and is good to use here.
The map of Byzantine southern Italy at the end of the 10th century is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0 and is also good to use here.
The image of the histamenon of Nikephoros Phokas and Basil II is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0 and is good for inclusion in this article.
Per Wikipedia:Alternative text for images, it is suggestion that all images in this article have an alt caption describing the images, especially for situations where the image is not available to the reader or where a user is using a screen reader due to visual impairment.

Life

I would suggest stating "According to historian John Skylitzes," for those unfamiliar with him and to give his account veracity.
The prose here states that Constantine VII freed Argyros of his vows, but in the lede, it is stated that Argyros renounced his monasticism. While both can be true, this should line up to read consistently. One statement reads as if Argyros took the action to leave the monastery, and the other seems as if the emperor took the action to spring Argyros from the monastery. This is a minor suggestion.
The section is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this section.

Hello West Virginian and thanks for taking the time to review this! I've added an infobox (although I think it rather redundant) and alt text. I also made the tweaks you suggested, and rephrased some other bits here and there where it seemed appropriate. Any other suggestions, above and beyond the GA requirements? Constantine ✍ 09:51, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Constantine, this article will easily meet Wikipedia:Featured article criteria because it is well-written, comprehensive, well-researched, neutral, stable, and has a lede that adheres to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section as discussed above. This article also uses consistent citations with verifiable sources; and is of an appropriate length with adequately licensed media included. My only other recommendation is that you nominate this article for a copyedit at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests so that another pair of wordsmithing eyes can take a look at it. Thank you for writing another fascinating article illustrating Byzantine history and for your timely response to my questions and comments above. -- West Virginian (talk) 12:18, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]