![]() | GDRT has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the
Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Why all-caps? Explain or move? Sherurcij ( talk) ( Terrorist Wikiproject) 20:01, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Anytime you can get the pg. numbers will be fine. I might just check out the book instead of always relying on online versions. If someone could find a map of SW Arabia (i.e. Yemen) and N. Ethiopia, that'd be a great addition, since finding a free picture of an inscription would be unlikely. ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 07:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Also, we should probably remove some of the citations. I'm moving on to another Aksumite king for now, but I know you'll come by and clean up, Llywrch. I'm guessing we should remove citations where it's the same page in the same work, given that a different citation doesn't interrupt the text (i.e. if a whole paragraph is from one page, just put one citation at the end instead of a citation after each sentence). ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 02:57, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Here's a note: "Herausgegeben von Uhlig, Siegbert, Encyclopaedia Aethiopica: A-C." (plus page number).
My German is very rusty but I think that means "Edited by" etc. etc. (If I'm wrong, go ahead, laugh!)
I'm not familiar with that encyclopedia (no surprise there), but I imagine that it has discrete, long, signed articles. (Perhaps the articles are signed with initials, but their meaning can be easily looked up. And perhaps they're not signed, which will simplify things. Let's assume, though, that they are signed.)
Shouldn't the note instead read something like: Aloysius Schnabel, "Aegypt"; in Siegbert von Uhlig, ed., Encyclopaedia Aethiopica (Wiesbaden:Harrassowitz, 2003–), 1:103? (Examples are fictional, of course.)
In other words article author (if known), article, (multivolume) work, publishing info, volume number, page number. (There's no reason to repeat the publishing info a second time.)
Since this is not an alphabetically ordered list, there's no reason to invert names. -- Hoary 10:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
This interesting article has been failed because of its difficulty in reading, it needs a general copy edit. It also needs to consider these types of statements
The Storm of October 1804, was a renomination that I had previously failed. When it reappeared on the nonimation list all the major concerns had been addressed and the copy edit was to do with UOM format, which I also helped to fix. With this article I think that what I suggested may cause a significant rewrite and alteration to presentation of the article that would be best done over a longer period than 7 days, I also know that it could be done effectively in less, but we do have other lives. If you would like this article can be considered on hold and that if we are happy with the result by the 21st I'll promote straight away. With the translation I was particularly concerned about the Aksumite inscription where Alexander Simar translation was given prominance over the other translations by way of format. I do think that the parentheses is bad style and I believe that this article should have every opportunity to become FA. It's friendlier to point that out privately with the article editors here than see an article go to FA and have it pointed out there. If you would like me to review again at anytime just ask, I have this article on my watch list and will read edits, do minor copy edits that I see anyway. Gnangarra 17:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
A couple of points. First, is the man Alexander Sima, or is he Andrew Sima? There's at least one instance of each. Secondly, the section on South Arabian involvement contains a paragraph (starting "Andrew Sima") that really does rather strain the concentration. I suggest chopping it into two or more smaller paragraphs; doing this well will of course require a little rewriting of each constituent paragraph, which is something I'm reluctant to do. -- Hoary 10:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations on your efforts, this article is now a GA article. Gnangarra 03:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I have decided after som consideration that the article just about meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article does have problems: The lead is too short, presentation of the sources are a little confusing and for the uninitiated there is no introduction as to the unusual spelling of the name (and why is it always in capitals?). Nevertheless, on balance I have decided to keep this as a GA. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, Jackyd101 ( talk) 17:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | GDRT has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the
Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Why all-caps? Explain or move? Sherurcij ( talk) ( Terrorist Wikiproject) 20:01, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Anytime you can get the pg. numbers will be fine. I might just check out the book instead of always relying on online versions. If someone could find a map of SW Arabia (i.e. Yemen) and N. Ethiopia, that'd be a great addition, since finding a free picture of an inscription would be unlikely. ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 07:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Also, we should probably remove some of the citations. I'm moving on to another Aksumite king for now, but I know you'll come by and clean up, Llywrch. I'm guessing we should remove citations where it's the same page in the same work, given that a different citation doesn't interrupt the text (i.e. if a whole paragraph is from one page, just put one citation at the end instead of a citation after each sentence). ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 02:57, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Here's a note: "Herausgegeben von Uhlig, Siegbert, Encyclopaedia Aethiopica: A-C." (plus page number).
My German is very rusty but I think that means "Edited by" etc. etc. (If I'm wrong, go ahead, laugh!)
I'm not familiar with that encyclopedia (no surprise there), but I imagine that it has discrete, long, signed articles. (Perhaps the articles are signed with initials, but their meaning can be easily looked up. And perhaps they're not signed, which will simplify things. Let's assume, though, that they are signed.)
Shouldn't the note instead read something like: Aloysius Schnabel, "Aegypt"; in Siegbert von Uhlig, ed., Encyclopaedia Aethiopica (Wiesbaden:Harrassowitz, 2003–), 1:103? (Examples are fictional, of course.)
In other words article author (if known), article, (multivolume) work, publishing info, volume number, page number. (There's no reason to repeat the publishing info a second time.)
Since this is not an alphabetically ordered list, there's no reason to invert names. -- Hoary 10:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
This interesting article has been failed because of its difficulty in reading, it needs a general copy edit. It also needs to consider these types of statements
The Storm of October 1804, was a renomination that I had previously failed. When it reappeared on the nonimation list all the major concerns had been addressed and the copy edit was to do with UOM format, which I also helped to fix. With this article I think that what I suggested may cause a significant rewrite and alteration to presentation of the article that would be best done over a longer period than 7 days, I also know that it could be done effectively in less, but we do have other lives. If you would like this article can be considered on hold and that if we are happy with the result by the 21st I'll promote straight away. With the translation I was particularly concerned about the Aksumite inscription where Alexander Simar translation was given prominance over the other translations by way of format. I do think that the parentheses is bad style and I believe that this article should have every opportunity to become FA. It's friendlier to point that out privately with the article editors here than see an article go to FA and have it pointed out there. If you would like me to review again at anytime just ask, I have this article on my watch list and will read edits, do minor copy edits that I see anyway. Gnangarra 17:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
A couple of points. First, is the man Alexander Sima, or is he Andrew Sima? There's at least one instance of each. Secondly, the section on South Arabian involvement contains a paragraph (starting "Andrew Sima") that really does rather strain the concentration. I suggest chopping it into two or more smaller paragraphs; doing this well will of course require a little rewriting of each constituent paragraph, which is something I'm reluctant to do. -- Hoary 10:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations on your efforts, this article is now a GA article. Gnangarra 03:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I have decided after som consideration that the article just about meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article does have problems: The lead is too short, presentation of the sources are a little confusing and for the uninitiated there is no introduction as to the unusual spelling of the name (and why is it always in capitals?). Nevertheless, on balance I have decided to keep this as a GA. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, Jackyd101 ( talk) 17:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)