Talk:Siege of Patras (805 or 807)

Siege of Patras (805 or 807) has been listed as one of the Warfare 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
September 26, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 15, 2013.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the failure of the Slavic siege of Patras c. 805/807 marked the end of independent Slavic rule in the Peloponnese?

Military history: Balkan / European / Early Muslim

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Balkan military history task force (c. 500–present)
	European military history task force
	Early Muslim military history task force (c. 600 – c. 1600)

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Greece Low‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history 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.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Siege of Patras (805 or 807)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk · contribs) 09:02, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Always happy to do one of these -- I'm guaranteed to learn something brand new... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:02, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Toolbox checks

No dab or EL issues.
No dup links.

Prose -- performed my habitual copyedit, pls let me know if I misunderstood/broke anything.

Content -- not my area of expertise of course but I've no reason on past experience not to trust your interpretation of events/sources, and certainly the tone seems perfectly neutral.

Structure & supporting materials -- logical and straightforward, and image licence seems fine.

Referencing -- just a formatting point: I'd have thought "Constantine Porphyrogennetos, De administrando imperio Ch. 49, ed. Moravscik & Jenkins (1967), pp. 229, 231" would be closer to the layout of the sources and other citations as "Moravscik; Jenkins (1967), Ch. 49, pp. 229, 231"

Summary -- nice, succinct article; sorry it took me a while to review but looking forward to passing as GA shortly. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ian! Thanks for taking the time to review this, and for ironing out some trouble spots with my prose! I've fixed the reference as suggested. Style aside, as a non-expert on the time and place, how would you rate the readability/accessibility of the content? I don't know if I will push this article further up the review scale, but I'd like to know if there is anything where you think I might clarify/expand upon. Cheers,

Well nothing really made me go "huh?" as I read it, so I guess that's a good sign! To me the level of detail is plenty for GA, I suppose if you were considering taking it further, the only thing that really stands out for me is that the background section is almost as large as the siege section (the point of the article). So perhaps an additional level of detail on the siege itself (if available from reliable sources) might be reasonable; a somewhat more detailed lead might also help. Doesn't affect my passing it as GA though. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]