Talk:Stefan Dragutin/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 17:39, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

• "He was the eldest son of King Stefan Uroš I of Serbia and Helen of Anjou. He received the title of "young king" in recognition of his right to succeed his father after a peace treaty between Uroš I and Béla IV of Hungary, who was the grandfather of Dragutin's wife, Catherine, in 1268." There is rather a lot in this sentence. Can I suggest splitting it into two, or even three, sentences.

• Done. (?)

• "File:Stefan Dragutin, Arilje.jpg" has two different PD tags. It only needs one of them. If PD-old, add a US PD tag; if PD-Serbia, add a source.

• Done.

• "File:King Stefan Uroš I with his son Stefan Dragutin.jpg" needs a US PD tag.

• Done.

• "File:Dinar of King Stefan Dragutin.jpg" needs a PD tag for the coin.

• Done.

• What is the source of the information in "File:Srem04-en.png"?

• The file contains a list of sources. I could refer to further works to verify it. Is it necessary?

• Numerous works in "Sources" are not cited. They should be deleted or moved to "Further reading".

• Done.

• Seven works in "Further reading" seems excessive,. Are they all helpful/necessary. It seems to be stretching "a reasonable number of works".

• Done.

• Caption: "King Dragutin, (founder's portrait (fresco) in Saint Achillius Church, painted during his lifetime, around 1296". Why the outer set of parentheses?

• Done.

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:39, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for starting the review. Borsoka (talk) 02:23, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

I have done a little copy editing. Let me know if there is anything you don't like or don't understand why I have done it.

• "forced him to abdicate in 1282." You sure about that date?

• No. :) Modified.

• "but he actually ruled his realm as an independent ruler". Suggest "he actually" → 'in practice he'.

• Done.

• "Milutin's mercenaries routed him in 1311 or 1312". Is enough known about this to be worth a red link?

• Sorry, I do not understand your above remark.

You may recall Third Punic War ;-) . In the lead there is a reference to the Battle of Oroscopa. It is read because an article on it does not (yet) exist; but it is linked because there is enough information on it, IMO, for someone to create such an article, so it is pre-empively linked. I am enquiring whether there is sufficient information available that someone might, one day, create an article on the 1311/12 battle. If there is, it should be linked and will show in red - hence "red link".

• I also like red links, but I have not read a detailed narration about the battle. Borsoka (talk) 01:47, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

• Link Cuman, Tartar, Turkish, mercenaries, prelate, abdicate, monastery and monk.

• Done.

• "Dragutin continued to style himself as king in his royal charters and coins." 1. Describing them as "royal" is PoV under the circumstances, and I suggest deleting the word. 2. 'and on his coins'.

• Done.

• "St. Achillios Church". Is the o a typo?

• Modified.

• Setton is cited, but isn't in the sources.

• Restored.

• "defeated Dragutin's army before 13 October 1307". If this means what it says, then 'defeated Dragutin's army on an unknown date, sometime before 13 October 1307'.

• Done.

• The last paragraph. I am not sure that it is necessary to have cite 44 four times in a row. Consider removing hte first three.

• Done. Borsoka (talk) 04:32, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 21:22, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

I also note that there is a cite to "Setton 1976, p. 130." that does not link to any entry in bibliography. Renata (talk) 04:06, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you. The source restored. Borsoka (talk) 04:32, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

That all looks good. I have expanded on the red link point above, but that is not a GAN issue, so I am promoting. Nice work. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:23, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your comprehensive and thorough review, and also for promoting the article. Have a nice day. Borsoka (talk) 01:47, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

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