Talk:Gökböri/GA1

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Gog the Mild in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 14:07, 18 September 2019 (UTC)Reply


  • The source of Hattin Estoire d'Eracles.jpg is a dead link; and it needs an explicit US PD tag.
Done - I think
  • Consider adding alt text to the images.
I don't know what that entails

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:07, 18 September 2019 (UTC)Reply


I have done a little copy editing which you will wish to check.

Alt text: optional, but covered under MOS:ALT.

I have carried out a limited number of spot checks, which raise no issues.

Earwig gives a green light re plagiarism.

Focused on the subject. NPoV and stable.

  • "He was known as Manafaradin to the Franks of the Crusader states" Information in the lead should be repeated in the main body. This isn't.
Fixed
  • US PD is fixed; thanks. The Source, under Summary, is still dead.
I have substituted another image - I think it is better as it is closer in date - it has an active source
  • "700 - 7,000" The values in the range should be separated by an unspaced en dash, per MOS:ENTO. Similarly with the page range for Patton.
Done, but variations in dashes confuse me
You are not alone in that.
  • "a religious college the Dar al-Hadith al-Muzaffariya" → 'the religious college Dar al-Hadith al-Muzaffariya'.
I would prefer "a religious college, the Dar al-Hadith al-Muzaffariya", largely because it is not generally well-known. For illustration, the difference between "He founded a college, the Slough College of Performing Arts", and "He founded Imperial College London".
Fine. That works.
  • Gibb: as a work within a volume, "The Aiyubids" should be within inverted commas, not in italics.
Done
  • Similarly, Hazard has the use of italics and inverted commas the wrong way round.
Done
  • Çaǧatay should use the same approach.
This is a journal title, does it have the same treatment?
Yes. Article title within inverted commas, journal name in italics.
Done

A very nice little article. Is it headed for FAC? Gog the Mild (talk) 18:14, 18 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I was surprised, when I was reading sources for the Battle of Arsuf, that such a prominent lieutenant of Saladin didn't already have an article. No, FAC is not a place I want to go to again! Urselius (talk) 19:03, 18 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
Yes. It is surprising, after all this time, what lacunae there still are in Wikipedia's historical coverage.
ACR perhaps? A much friendlier and more relaxed environment. Gog the Mild (talk) 09:36, 19 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Good work. Promoting. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:12, 19 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose ( ) 1b. MoS ( ) 2a. ref layout ( ) 2b. cites WP:RS ( ) 2c. no WP:OR ( ) 2d. no WP:CV ( )
3a. broadness ( ) 3b. focus ( ) 4. neutral ( ) 5. stable ( ) 6a. free or tagged images ( ) 6b. pics relevant ( )
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked   are unassessed