Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleAvar–Byzantine wars has been listed as one of the Warfare 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 13, 2018 Good article nomineeListed
May 15, 2018 WikiProject A-class reviewNot approved
Current status: Good article

source review tips

To check as many errors as possible in the references and/or notes, I recommend using User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck in conjunction with two other scripts. You can install them as follows:

  • First, copy/paste importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js'); to Special:MyPage/common.js .
  • On the same page and below that script add importScript('User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck.js');. Save that page.
  • Finally go to to Special:MyPage/common.css and add .citation-comment {display: inline !important;} /* show all Citation Style 1 error messages */.

When you've added all those, go to an article to check for various messages in its notes and references. (You may need to clear your browser's cache first). The output of User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck is not foolproof and can be verbose. Use common sense when interpreting output (especially with respect to sorting errors). Reading the explanatory page will help more than a little. The least urgent message of all is probably Missing archive link; archiving weblinks is good practice but lack of archiving will probably not be mentioned in any content review.  Lingzhi ♦  (talk) 04:15, 16 February 2018 (UTC) reply

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Avar–Byzantine wars/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gog the Mild ( talk · contribs) 10:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria
Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
    2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. [1]
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose); [2]
    (c) it contains no original research; and
    (d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; [3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. [4]
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. [6]

Review

  1. Well-written:
    2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
    (b) (MoS) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
    (c) (original research) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
    (b) (focused) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
    5. Notes Result
    The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. Notes Result
    The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) Good use of maps. Very helpful. Pass Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass

Result

Result Notes
Pass Pass A solid, unusually well referenced, unusually well illustrated, and well written article leaving an assessor with little to do. Good use of maps. Classy work. Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Discussion

Please add any related discussion here.

  • Ref 24, Curta, is not linked.
  •  Done
  • Only 1 of your 13 sources has publisher location. (For information only, not a fail issue at B class.)
  •  Done

Prose (most of these are just suggestions):

  • "...while the Persians and Avars siege Constantinople in 626." Should be "besiege" (or "lay siege to") - first caption.
  •  Done
  • "conflicts were first initiated in 568". Initiated implies first.
  •  Done
  • "The Avars usually raided the Balkans when the Byzantine Empire was distracted elsewhere, usually in its frequent wars with the Sassanid Empire in the East." Replace the second "usually" with "typically"? Or the first.
  •  Done
  • "but allegedly sent 10,000 sent Kotrigur Huns"
  •  Done
  • "and a further eight of nine cities in 586." This doesn't really make sense. Which 9 cities?
    The source doesn't mention the names, unfortunately, just that 9 were sieged and 8 (of the nine) were captured. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:05, 13 March 2018 (UTC) reply
  • "The next year, in 602, the Antes began to invade the Avars" I am not sure that one can invade a people. "invade the Avars' lands" perhaps?
  •  Done
  • "Byzantine naval superiority also made communication between the two forces more difficult." I am not sure that "more is necessary.
  •  Done
  • "which remained until their conquest by Charlemagne." It would be helpful to give a date for this event. Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:43, 12 March 2018 (UTC) reply
  •  Done

Infobox:

  • "Territorial changes: Balkans annexed by Avars, continually recaptured until final Avar possession." This doesn't match too well with the last section of the article. I can't actually think of a better way to phrase things, but I flag it up in case you can. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:31, 12 March 2018 (UTC) reply
  •  Done

Additional notes

  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Avar–Byzantine_wars&oldid=1212532324"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleAvar–Byzantine wars has been listed as one of the Warfare 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 13, 2018 Good article nomineeListed
May 15, 2018 WikiProject A-class reviewNot approved
Current status: Good article

source review tips

To check as many errors as possible in the references and/or notes, I recommend using User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck in conjunction with two other scripts. You can install them as follows:

  • First, copy/paste importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js'); to Special:MyPage/common.js .
  • On the same page and below that script add importScript('User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck.js');. Save that page.
  • Finally go to to Special:MyPage/common.css and add .citation-comment {display: inline !important;} /* show all Citation Style 1 error messages */.

When you've added all those, go to an article to check for various messages in its notes and references. (You may need to clear your browser's cache first). The output of User:Lingzhi/reviewsourcecheck is not foolproof and can be verbose. Use common sense when interpreting output (especially with respect to sorting errors). Reading the explanatory page will help more than a little. The least urgent message of all is probably Missing archive link; archiving weblinks is good practice but lack of archiving will probably not be mentioned in any content review.  Lingzhi ♦  (talk) 04:15, 16 February 2018 (UTC) reply

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Avar–Byzantine wars/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gog the Mild ( talk · contribs) 10:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria
Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
    2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. [1]
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose); [2]
    (c) it contains no original research; and
    (d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; [3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. [4]
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. [6]

Review

  1. Well-written:
    2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
    (b) (MoS) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
    (c) (original research) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
    (b) (focused) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
    5. Notes Result
    The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. Notes Result
    The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) Good use of maps. Very helpful. Pass Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass

Result

Result Notes
Pass Pass A solid, unusually well referenced, unusually well illustrated, and well written article leaving an assessor with little to do. Good use of maps. Classy work. Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Discussion

Please add any related discussion here.

  • Ref 24, Curta, is not linked.
  •  Done
  • Only 1 of your 13 sources has publisher location. (For information only, not a fail issue at B class.)
  •  Done

Prose (most of these are just suggestions):

  • "...while the Persians and Avars siege Constantinople in 626." Should be "besiege" (or "lay siege to") - first caption.
  •  Done
  • "conflicts were first initiated in 568". Initiated implies first.
  •  Done
  • "The Avars usually raided the Balkans when the Byzantine Empire was distracted elsewhere, usually in its frequent wars with the Sassanid Empire in the East." Replace the second "usually" with "typically"? Or the first.
  •  Done
  • "but allegedly sent 10,000 sent Kotrigur Huns"
  •  Done
  • "and a further eight of nine cities in 586." This doesn't really make sense. Which 9 cities?
    The source doesn't mention the names, unfortunately, just that 9 were sieged and 8 (of the nine) were captured. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:05, 13 March 2018 (UTC) reply
  • "The next year, in 602, the Antes began to invade the Avars" I am not sure that one can invade a people. "invade the Avars' lands" perhaps?
  •  Done
  • "Byzantine naval superiority also made communication between the two forces more difficult." I am not sure that "more is necessary.
  •  Done
  • "which remained until their conquest by Charlemagne." It would be helpful to give a date for this event. Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:43, 12 March 2018 (UTC) reply
  •  Done

Infobox:

  • "Territorial changes: Balkans annexed by Avars, continually recaptured until final Avar possession." This doesn't match too well with the last section of the article. I can't actually think of a better way to phrase things, but I flag it up in case you can. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:31, 12 March 2018 (UTC) reply
  •  Done

Additional notes

  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Avar–Byzantine_wars&oldid=1212532324"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE