Hello, I am starting a review on this article. I chose it because it is the oldest nomination that has not had a review started. It is of a type (large complex article on a topic that is not well known in the English Wikipedia) that can be slow to get reviewed, and I tend to take those. North8000 (
talk)
13:35, 17 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Just to get my request in early, is there a person or persons here that would probably handle or respond to any issues that I bring up? North8000 (
talk)
13:58, 17 February 2017 (UTC)reply
GA criteria final checklist
Well-written
Small English grammar issues that I plan to fix
There are numerous small English grammar issues. I think that it would be faster for me to fix them than note them and I'd be happy to do so. North8000 (
talk)
21:01, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Done through the end of the "Kidnapping of Henryk IV Probus by Bolesław II Rogatka. Battle of Stolec" section. North8000 (
talk)
22:23, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Done through the end of the article. It still has the issues listed below (which I couldn't fix because I didn't know what they were trying to say). Still has some subtler grammar issues, but, after the below ones are fixed, the remaining ones are not enough to stop GA status. North8000 (
talk)
04:10, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
English grammar / mis-wording issues that North8000 can't fix and so need fixing by others
In the lead, can you clarify "down from Lesser Poland". Is this stepping down from a particular role for Lesser Poland? North8000 (
talk)
21:45, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
in the "Cooperation with King...." section, the phrase "They are also known political decisions that were made there" has a grammar problem but I don't know what it is trying to say. Can you fix? North8000 (
talk)
23:34, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the second paragraph in the "Treaty of Kepno...." section, "unlikely to Mestwin II, who was accompanied by only one voivode" has a grammar problem but I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Could you clarify or fix? North8000 (
talk)
23:45, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the "Marriage with Rikissa..." section, "who a year received from Przemysł II the village of Giecz in gratitude for his services" has a grammar problem but I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Could you clarify or fix? North8000 (
talk)
01:11, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the "royal government and death" section, "where confirmed the privileges of the Cistercian monasteries in Oliwa and Żarnowiec" has a grammar problem but I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Could you clarify or fix? North8000 (
talk)
02:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the "royal government and death" section, "though the Kronika wielkopolska failed to bring his work to the time of his contemporaries, and so the years 1295–1296[213] and told the events of Rogoźno" has grammar issues / is unclear. I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Could you clarify or fix? North8000 (
talk)
02:50, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the "Seals and coinage" section, the following: "due to the activities of mints certified by sources and the occurrence of witnesses made by the ruler of legal actions – minters,[275] can be almost certain that any coins existed" has grammar issues / is unclear. I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Can you clarify / fix it? North8000 (
talk)
03:37, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the "Seals and coinage" section, the sentence "In turn, appears on the reverse side facing the right side of the crowned eagle." has grammar issues / is unclear. I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Could you clarify or fix?North8000 (
talk)
03:31, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Near the end of the "Economic policy" section, there were many phrases that I worked on (please check that I didn't change any facts) but there was one remaining: "In 1294 a privilege was granted ranging cottagers on German law in the Old Town in Kalisz" which has grammar issues / is unclear. I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Can you fix/ clarify? North8000 (
talk)
03:58, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
As written, the second half of the first paragraph in the "War with Brandenburg. Expedition to Neumark" section seems to conflict with itself. Says it failed, then talks about him doing victor type actions. Can you clarify? North8000 (
talk)
21:54, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
The lineage section is a statement of who his ancestors were (or, in some cases, probably were. Could you provide a cite / source for that? North8000 (
talk)
04:02, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
"KDW" is used a large amount of times in sparse cites, but it's unclear which item in the Bibliography it is referring to, and I don't know what it is. Does it have an author? Is there some way to clarify? North8000 (
talk)
14:02, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
To flesh out and summarize the one open issue , "KDW" is used 66 times as a reference, but it is listed only as "KDW" for each cite, with no explanation of what it is, no listing as such in the bibliography, or no linkage to any listing in the bibliography. So I think that this is a significant but easily fixed issue. North8000 (
talk)
13:43, 7 March 2017 (UTC)reply
Image status #1 - #4 are public domain. #5 has a suitable license. #6-#8 are public domain. #9 (church) 
 (map) have a suitable licenses. #11, #12 are public domain. #13 (church) has a suitable license. #14 has a suitable license #15, #16 (seals) are public domain.
This article will need involvement by someone on behalf of the article to pass the current GA review
This article will need involvement by someone on behalf of the article to pass the current GA review. I'm writing this here (outside of the GA review)because many folks probably have the article on their watchlist but not the transcluded GA review, Overall it is an excellent article which shows an immense amount of good research and work. However, it had an immense amount of "writing in the English language" grammar issues. I was happy to fix the ones that I could (over 100 fixes) but I listed 12 where I could not do that. Most of those were because I could not even tell what the sentence or phrase was intended to say. I really can't pass this excellent article with those 12 significant wording problems. I already wrote on the user page of the person who was a major contributor and nominator. And they appear to have no email on their account. Sincerely, North8000 (
talk)
14:09, 24 February 2017 (UTC) GA Reviewer.reply
Repeating my earlier post from above, to flesh out and summarize the one open issue , "KDW" is used 66 times as a reference, but it is listed only as "KDW" for each cite, with no explanation of what it is, no listing as such in the bibliography, or no linkage to any listing in the bibliography. So I think that this is a significant but easily fixed issue. North8000 (
talk)
12:47, 8 March 2017 (UTC)reply
Congratulations, this article passes as a Wikipedia Good Article. What an immense amount of excellent work was done on this article! And what an immense amount of excellent, sourced information that it contains!
In this case the article's nominator is also a substantial contributor to it. With the large amount of time I spent, including, in addition to the review, fixing a large amount of grammatical issues, with substantial attempts to communicate, multiple followups on open items, extension of the review process to 3 weeks for the issues that I could not fix to get fixed, it was a bit unsettling to not receive any communication back, including on the extended amount of time I was waiting for the fixes on the items which I could not fix. Possibly this may be useful feedback on any future GA reviews.
Hello, I am starting a review on this article. I chose it because it is the oldest nomination that has not had a review started. It is of a type (large complex article on a topic that is not well known in the English Wikipedia) that can be slow to get reviewed, and I tend to take those. North8000 (
talk)
13:35, 17 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Just to get my request in early, is there a person or persons here that would probably handle or respond to any issues that I bring up? North8000 (
talk)
13:58, 17 February 2017 (UTC)reply
GA criteria final checklist
Well-written
Small English grammar issues that I plan to fix
There are numerous small English grammar issues. I think that it would be faster for me to fix them than note them and I'd be happy to do so. North8000 (
talk)
21:01, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Done through the end of the "Kidnapping of Henryk IV Probus by Bolesław II Rogatka. Battle of Stolec" section. North8000 (
talk)
22:23, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Done through the end of the article. It still has the issues listed below (which I couldn't fix because I didn't know what they were trying to say). Still has some subtler grammar issues, but, after the below ones are fixed, the remaining ones are not enough to stop GA status. North8000 (
talk)
04:10, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
English grammar / mis-wording issues that North8000 can't fix and so need fixing by others
In the lead, can you clarify "down from Lesser Poland". Is this stepping down from a particular role for Lesser Poland? North8000 (
talk)
21:45, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
in the "Cooperation with King...." section, the phrase "They are also known political decisions that were made there" has a grammar problem but I don't know what it is trying to say. Can you fix? North8000 (
talk)
23:34, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the second paragraph in the "Treaty of Kepno...." section, "unlikely to Mestwin II, who was accompanied by only one voivode" has a grammar problem but I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Could you clarify or fix? North8000 (
talk)
23:45, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the "Marriage with Rikissa..." section, "who a year received from Przemysł II the village of Giecz in gratitude for his services" has a grammar problem but I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Could you clarify or fix? North8000 (
talk)
01:11, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the "royal government and death" section, "where confirmed the privileges of the Cistercian monasteries in Oliwa and Żarnowiec" has a grammar problem but I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Could you clarify or fix? North8000 (
talk)
02:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the "royal government and death" section, "though the Kronika wielkopolska failed to bring his work to the time of his contemporaries, and so the years 1295–1296[213] and told the events of Rogoźno" has grammar issues / is unclear. I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Could you clarify or fix? North8000 (
talk)
02:50, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the "Seals and coinage" section, the following: "due to the activities of mints certified by sources and the occurrence of witnesses made by the ruler of legal actions – minters,[275] can be almost certain that any coins existed" has grammar issues / is unclear. I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Can you clarify / fix it? North8000 (
talk)
03:37, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
In the "Seals and coinage" section, the sentence "In turn, appears on the reverse side facing the right side of the crowned eagle." has grammar issues / is unclear. I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Could you clarify or fix?North8000 (
talk)
03:31, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Near the end of the "Economic policy" section, there were many phrases that I worked on (please check that I didn't change any facts) but there was one remaining: "In 1294 a privilege was granted ranging cottagers on German law in the Old Town in Kalisz" which has grammar issues / is unclear. I can't fix it because I don't know what it is trying to say. Can you fix/ clarify? North8000 (
talk)
03:58, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
As written, the second half of the first paragraph in the "War with Brandenburg. Expedition to Neumark" section seems to conflict with itself. Says it failed, then talks about him doing victor type actions. Can you clarify? North8000 (
talk)
21:54, 20 February 2017 (UTC)reply
The lineage section is a statement of who his ancestors were (or, in some cases, probably were. Could you provide a cite / source for that? North8000 (
talk)
04:02, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
"KDW" is used a large amount of times in sparse cites, but it's unclear which item in the Bibliography it is referring to, and I don't know what it is. Does it have an author? Is there some way to clarify? North8000 (
talk)
14:02, 21 February 2017 (UTC)reply
To flesh out and summarize the one open issue , "KDW" is used 66 times as a reference, but it is listed only as "KDW" for each cite, with no explanation of what it is, no listing as such in the bibliography, or no linkage to any listing in the bibliography. So I think that this is a significant but easily fixed issue. North8000 (
talk)
13:43, 7 March 2017 (UTC)reply
Image status #1 - #4 are public domain. #5 has a suitable license. #6-#8 are public domain. #9 (church) 
 (map) have a suitable licenses. #11, #12 are public domain. #13 (church) has a suitable license. #14 has a suitable license #15, #16 (seals) are public domain.
This article will need involvement by someone on behalf of the article to pass the current GA review
This article will need involvement by someone on behalf of the article to pass the current GA review. I'm writing this here (outside of the GA review)because many folks probably have the article on their watchlist but not the transcluded GA review, Overall it is an excellent article which shows an immense amount of good research and work. However, it had an immense amount of "writing in the English language" grammar issues. I was happy to fix the ones that I could (over 100 fixes) but I listed 12 where I could not do that. Most of those were because I could not even tell what the sentence or phrase was intended to say. I really can't pass this excellent article with those 12 significant wording problems. I already wrote on the user page of the person who was a major contributor and nominator. And they appear to have no email on their account. Sincerely, North8000 (
talk)
14:09, 24 February 2017 (UTC) GA Reviewer.reply
Repeating my earlier post from above, to flesh out and summarize the one open issue , "KDW" is used 66 times as a reference, but it is listed only as "KDW" for each cite, with no explanation of what it is, no listing as such in the bibliography, or no linkage to any listing in the bibliography. So I think that this is a significant but easily fixed issue. North8000 (
talk)
12:47, 8 March 2017 (UTC)reply
Congratulations, this article passes as a Wikipedia Good Article. What an immense amount of excellent work was done on this article! And what an immense amount of excellent, sourced information that it contains!
In this case the article's nominator is also a substantial contributor to it. With the large amount of time I spent, including, in addition to the review, fixing a large amount of grammatical issues, with substantial attempts to communicate, multiple followups on open items, extension of the review process to 3 weeks for the issues that I could not fix to get fixed, it was a bit unsettling to not receive any communication back, including on the extended amount of time I was waiting for the fixes on the items which I could not fix. Possibly this may be useful feedback on any future GA reviews.