Talk:Maslama ibn Abd al-Malik/GA1
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk · contribs) 01:09, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Haven't reviewed one of yours for a while, so it's just time methinks... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:09, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you, it will be a pleasure ;). I intended to have this nominated much earlier, but I haven't had much time lately... Constantine ✍ 18:58, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Toolbox check
- No dab or external link issues.
Prose
- I know ancient and medieval literature seems to be replete with seasonal references rather than more precise timings, but is it possible to avoid "summer", etc, and use "middle of the year" or some other appropriate term?
- I don't have an issue with the use of "winter" in the siege continued into the winter, if it's to denote colder and harsher conditions for the besiegers, as opposed to simply a time of year (if it is just time of year, prefer to see "end of the year" or some such if we possible can).
Referencing
- Fully cited and references appear okay.
- You have Harv errors in the References section -- use this script to highlight them.
Supporting materials
- Infobox and image licensing look good, although File:47-cropped-manasses-chronicle.jpg has a couple of tags that could be tidied up.
Structure/coverage -- seem appropriate.
Summary -- good work, nothing serious holding this back from GA, just like to get your responses to the above points first. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:01, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review. I've fixed the Harvard issue. On the two prose issues, given the fact that campaigning by land or sea until quite recently was a seasonal affair (and the Arabs even classed their raids into Asia Minor as "spring", "summer" and "winter" raids), the references to spring or summer are IMO rather more appropriate than "middle of the year" etc., plus, as you have guessed, they are the only indication as to the time period that the sources contain. I've changed the one case where a more precise date is known (Leo's entry into Cple), but otherwise I am loath to change anything. I've also clarified the wintering before Cple issue, adding that the winter was unusually harsh and long. Anything else? Any suggestions for future expansion or spots you'd like to see better clarified? Constantine ✍ 17:25, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
- Re. the seasonal thing, I understand. It's not something that concerns me greatly, although it does some people (there's a discussion going on as we speak at Talk:Norman conquest of England). You can only be as precise as your sources, so if you've done your best with them that's all you can do. As to potential expansion/clarification, although this era (and area) interests me, it's by no means my pet subject, so I tend to come to your articles to learn! Thus I tend to approach an article like this by what's in it rather than what might not be in it... ;-) Anyway, I'm ready to slap the GA tag on the article, just waiting a bit to ensure stability as they've been some new edits during the review. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:07, 8 June 2013 (UTC)