Wikipedia:Peer review/Foundation of Moldavia/archive1

Foundation of Moldavia

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review before its GAN. All comments are welcome.

Thanks, Borsoka (talk) 03:06, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Comments

• Repeating the same reference over and over again is unecessary.
• The article is kind of long (~61 kB), so is there any way to split it?
• Since my next couple comments seemed like nitpicks, I did them myself.
• There is one dead link in the article.--Tomandjerry211 (Let's have a chat) 20:44, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Tomandjerry211, thank you for your comments. I fully agree with you: the article is long. I am thinking of shortening the "Background" section instead of splitting it. The dead link was deleted. Borsoka (talk) 01:24, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Comments. I did a little copyediting. These are my edits. I wasn't always sure that I got your meaning, so you may need to revert some of that. - Dank (push to talk) 03:22, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Dank, thank you for your edits. I made some minor changes. Feel free to revert them if you think they are not appropriate. Borsoka (talk) 04:26, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Your changes are fine. They're not what I would have done, but I can see good reasons for them. - Dank (push to talk) 04:34, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Csisc

First, I have to thank you for your work about the Foundation of Moldavia... The topic is important and I think that you can proposed it for getting the GA Status. It shows a good overview about the History of Moldavia and its development and gives some detailed information about influencing people in founding Moldavia. However, the work lacks from some facts:

• Commemoration: The work has not shown the importance of the Foundation of Moldavia to people living there nowadays. You should cite events related to the commemoration of the Foundation of Moldavia and its major main leaders. You can also add a part about the social thoughts about the foundation of Moldavia. You can cite the current reputation of the main leaders of the Foundation of Moldavia. I think that working about this subject would be very efficient.
• Arts: You should also cite the romans, plays, draws, films done about the Foundation of Moldavia. As this fact is important in the History of Romania, I think that you will have a good list of these artistic works. You should involve them and describe the general overview about the Foundation of Moldavia given by these works. You will give by this a better artistic overview about the fact and a better description about the thoughts of people about it till now.
• Templates: the work lacks of significant templates. You should add a template in the beginning describing the period of the foundation of Moldavia, its founders... More explanations of the development of Moldova should be given in this innovative template. You can also add some templates in the work in which you involve more details about the situation of Moldavia in each period involving topology and politics. This fact will be very important.
• Honours: You can give some awards given for works about the Foundation of Moldova... You can give the historical sites related to the Foundation of Moldavia and the archeological samples from that period exposed worldwide... This could be a better advance in your excellent work because people who like to learn more about this very important phenomenon will have the alternatives to find alternative ways to learn more about the Foundation of Moldova

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 12:30, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Csisc, thank you for your comments. Borsoka (talk) 03:39, 28 April 2015 (UTC)