Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Byzantine navy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The article passed the GA review without problems in March, and after some additions & restructuring, I feel it is much improved and as comprehensive as it can get. I would like to submit it for FAR in due course, so any comments are appreciated! Cplakidas (talk) 10:45, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment(s)
- First off, I believe in your above statement you ment to FAC instead of FAR since the article has yet to be awarded its bronze star :)
- In the section "The naval expeditions of Manuel I" you have the sentence "Despite initial successes, the expedition was ultimately defeated in 1156, 4 Byzantine ships were captured." I would recommend adding a word of some sort between the 1156 and the 4, otherwise people speed reading may mistake that as one whole number instead of two seperate numbers.
- Make sure none of your sentence start with a number, spell the number out if your sentence starts with a numerical quantity. I spotted at least one instance of this and fixed it myself, but it may be worth the effort to make another pass to ensure that the article is fully compliant with the MoS on this issue.
- Make sure that any measurement figures given use nonbreaking spaces. Case in point: The third sentence of the third paragraph in the ships section contains the line "Overall length must have been between 35 and 40 m.", but doesn't appear between the "40" and the "m".
- Otherwise it looks good. Well done. TomStar81 (Talk) 10:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- On point 1), yes, I did. ;P. Point 2) has been taken care of, and I can't find any other occurrences of point 3), although I'll keep looking. As for 4), I changed "m" to meters, so it is OK. Aside from these minor issues though, I would really like to know though how the article reads to a non-expert. Where it is too loaded with information, or where more ought to be added, if phrasing is awkward at places, etc. Thanks, Cplakidas (talk) 14:55, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I think you have just the right amount of information, although as a big battleship man myself I may be just a little bias :) TomStar81 (Talk) 23:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Excellent Article. No objections here. Cheers! Cam (Chat) 22:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Nice article. Kyriakos (talk) 02:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Good work. Cla68 (talk) 07:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.