![]() | Golubac Fortress was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've noticed that there is another article at Golubački grad that I suspect this article should be merged into. Anyone good with managing mergers want to take a look at this? jugander ( t) 11:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Can anyone verify whether it was built in the 13th century (1200's) or 14th century (1300's)? English sites I've found disagree, two German ones say 1300's, and I don't know Serbian, much less Cyrillic, to try and see what those sites say. I'm sticking with 1300's until it's figured out, since that's the more likely date if the contradiction is based on errors/confusion in understanding the -th century bit. - Bbik 04:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Although I'm calling the current version of this page "done" for now, there are still questions remaining that could fill in some of the gaps. If anyone has any of the answers but doesn't want to edit the page for some reason, let me know what the details are/where they came from and I'd be more than happy to add it in myself.
Thanks to anyone who helps! - Bbik 03:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
3.No.It just says that when Hungarians refused,he gave it to the Turks.
6.In 1444.On 22 of august Smederevo was re-entered and very soon all other parts of Despotate.
CrniBombarder!!! (†) 04:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Some notes:
Duja ► 09:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Some replies:
1) All of the Temes's are Timisoara's. I guess it's better to stick to "Temes", as we're talking about historical contexts.
5) As for "jezičeski" I don't have any idea. The apparent modern cognate "jezički" means "linguistic"/"lingual". No GHits other than Corovic's book.
6) According to
Britannica 1911, Treaty of Szeged was signed on July 1 1444.
Here,
here and
here is some interesting material on the surrounding events.
Duja
► 09:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
This is a lovely article - suggest you submit for GA. Here's the automated 'peer review' from Andz:-
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question. (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 25 meters, use 25 meters, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 25 meters.
[?]You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Mcginnly | Natter 12:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I have placed this article on hold per the following concerns. Once these are met I will give the article a more thorough review.
At a glance:
These are just a few things that will need to be fixed to pass GAC (probably). I can go through the prose and do a more in depth assessment too, but these should probably be addressed first. IvoShandor 08:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
If the article failed the nomination, the comments below will help in addressing the problems. Once these tasks are accomplished, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. If you feel that this review is in error, please feel free to take it to a GA review. You can see how I, personally, applied the six criteria above at this link. I sincerely thank you for your work so far.
If your article passed the nomination, congratulations on making Wikipedia all the better. Your contributions are greatly appreciated. If you didn't know there is a groovy user box, {{ User Good Articles}}, for those users who have significantly contributed to a good article. The " essay" linked above is also how the criteria are applied to passing articles as well. Thanks again for your hard work.
Review by: IvoShandor
IvoShandor 07:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Definitely not GA-status.-- Zoupan 22:17, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Golubac Fortress. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.rastko.org.rs/smederevo/spomenici_e.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:54, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Golubac Fortress. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:55, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
This older GA promotion is one of the articles flagged as high-risk for not meeting the modern GA criteria at WP:SWEEPS2023. My primary concern here is that a number of the sources used do not rise to the level of reliability required for GA sourcing:
If the sourcing is not improved, a good article reassessment will likely be necessary. Hog Farm Talk 18:06, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
![]() | Golubac Fortress was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've noticed that there is another article at Golubački grad that I suspect this article should be merged into. Anyone good with managing mergers want to take a look at this? jugander ( t) 11:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Can anyone verify whether it was built in the 13th century (1200's) or 14th century (1300's)? English sites I've found disagree, two German ones say 1300's, and I don't know Serbian, much less Cyrillic, to try and see what those sites say. I'm sticking with 1300's until it's figured out, since that's the more likely date if the contradiction is based on errors/confusion in understanding the -th century bit. - Bbik 04:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Although I'm calling the current version of this page "done" for now, there are still questions remaining that could fill in some of the gaps. If anyone has any of the answers but doesn't want to edit the page for some reason, let me know what the details are/where they came from and I'd be more than happy to add it in myself.
Thanks to anyone who helps! - Bbik 03:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
3.No.It just says that when Hungarians refused,he gave it to the Turks.
6.In 1444.On 22 of august Smederevo was re-entered and very soon all other parts of Despotate.
CrniBombarder!!! (†) 04:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Some notes:
Duja ► 09:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Some replies:
1) All of the Temes's are Timisoara's. I guess it's better to stick to "Temes", as we're talking about historical contexts.
5) As for "jezičeski" I don't have any idea. The apparent modern cognate "jezički" means "linguistic"/"lingual". No GHits other than Corovic's book.
6) According to
Britannica 1911, Treaty of Szeged was signed on July 1 1444.
Here,
here and
here is some interesting material on the surrounding events.
Duja
► 09:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
This is a lovely article - suggest you submit for GA. Here's the automated 'peer review' from Andz:-
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question. (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 25 meters, use 25 meters, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 25 meters.
[?]You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Mcginnly | Natter 12:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I have placed this article on hold per the following concerns. Once these are met I will give the article a more thorough review.
At a glance:
These are just a few things that will need to be fixed to pass GAC (probably). I can go through the prose and do a more in depth assessment too, but these should probably be addressed first. IvoShandor 08:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
If the article failed the nomination, the comments below will help in addressing the problems. Once these tasks are accomplished, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. If you feel that this review is in error, please feel free to take it to a GA review. You can see how I, personally, applied the six criteria above at this link. I sincerely thank you for your work so far.
If your article passed the nomination, congratulations on making Wikipedia all the better. Your contributions are greatly appreciated. If you didn't know there is a groovy user box, {{ User Good Articles}}, for those users who have significantly contributed to a good article. The " essay" linked above is also how the criteria are applied to passing articles as well. Thanks again for your hard work.
Review by: IvoShandor
IvoShandor 07:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Definitely not GA-status.-- Zoupan 22:17, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Golubac Fortress. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.rastko.org.rs/smederevo/spomenici_e.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:54, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Golubac Fortress. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:55, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
This older GA promotion is one of the articles flagged as high-risk for not meeting the modern GA criteria at WP:SWEEPS2023. My primary concern here is that a number of the sources used do not rise to the level of reliability required for GA sourcing:
If the sourcing is not improved, a good article reassessment will likely be necessary. Hog Farm Talk 18:06, 27 March 2024 (UTC)