This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Theodore Synadenos article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
A fact from Theodore Synadenos appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 January 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
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
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
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
Oh, look. Obscure Byzantine guy... seems a perfect fit for someone who usually writes on obscure Anglo-Norman guys! (Hi, Constantine, long time no see!)... Review incoming. Ealdgyth - Talk16:33, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
Per CorenSearchBot, no copyright violations found. Random googling of three phrases showed no copyright violations (just Wikipedia mirrors or scrapers).
References:
Note 1 "PLP 27120" ... what does that mean?
It is the usual abbreviation for the Prosopographisches Lexikon der Palaiologenzeit, I've added a link to make it clearer.
Lead:
"... played an important role... scion of an important noble lineage.... first and most important supporters..." lots of repetition here, can we vary it a bit?
Rephrased.
"Forced to reconcile himself with Kantakouzenos's enemies" this isn't clear exactly ... how can you reconcile yourself? Is "himself" just redundant here?
Rephrased.
Under:
** "after his father's death" ... a bit unclear who is meant by "his"... can we make this a bit clearer?
Rephrased.
The sentence starting "The old emperor, distrusting Synadenos' loyalty...." is one tangled long sentence full of clauses. Can we break it up just a bit?
Rephrased.
"Andronikos III was forced to resign the throne and retire to a monastery" I think you mean "Andronikos II" here?
Indeed. Corrected.
Renewed:
"victor of the disastrous civil war" why was it any more disastrous than other civil wars?
This particular war is the one that well and truly broke the spine of Byzantium, and there was not to be any recovery from it, even a minor onw. I added a short explanation why, but I am not certain if it fits or even if it is necessary; the civil war article makes the point abundantly clear.
I made some copyedits.
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 - Talk16:56, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ealdgyth, indeed long time no see, I hope everything is OK with you, and thanks for taking the time to review this! I've fixed most of the stuff you recommended. A question, though: as someone who also writes on obscure guys, do you think I should add more context at places? Usually I am wary of adding anything but the most pertinent explanations, as with these obscure guys the context filler will risk outweighing the actual material on them, but I'd like another opinion. Cheers, Constantine ✍ 11:00, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Generally for GA level ... I do what you do. FA level, I depend on the reviewers to tell me when more context is needed. Sometimes that ends up being quite a lot - see Hygeberht, where the background probably does almost outweigh the guy ... Everything looks good here, passing now. Ealdgyth - Talk13:57, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
b (citations to reliable sources): 
