Talk:Mindaugas/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 02:30, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   • Assassination section, "The Livonian Order used this period to gain control over Samogitian lands." What period?

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   • Ref 17 (Rowell) needs to have the title formatted as the link, rather than just having a bare link.
   • Ref 20 needs to have the title changed so that it is not in all capital letters. Even if the original source uses all capital letters, the Wikipedia ref shouldn't.
   • Ref 30 needs to be uncapitalized as well.
   • I added a fact tag in one place that needs a reference.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   • I am concerned about whether the coverage of this article is complete, or if the information (when present) is presented as accessibly as possible. In my opinion, there is the need for an "Early life and family" section before the "Rise to Power" section. The article begins very abruptly with Mindaugus already grown and on his way to the kingship. The details about his family are scattered throughout the article, and the reader, to get a complete view, has to pick his way through all of the other information. This section could be basically a summary of the House of Mindaugas article, with a collection of the information on what is known about his parents, wives and children. Most of the information could stay scattered throughout the article, as long as it is not a complete duplicate (the information about the baptisms of his wife and sons, for example, should stay in that section). Start out the section with something like "Mindaugus was born around 1203 AD, to father and mother (if known). Not much is known about his early life (or give the information if it is). He was married three times, but only the name of his second wife is known. He married his first wife around x year and had x children with her....etc, etc. etc." See what I'm getting at? This collection of information would help the reader to understand the family connections before diving headfirst into his political, backstabbing career as noble and king.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   • Text should not be sandwiched between images as it is in the "The Kingdom of Lithuania" section. There may be too many images in this article - the text should flow well without being crammed between images.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I have a few issues with images, prose and references, but my main concern is the layout of family information within the article. I am placing the article on hold for now. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Dana boomer (talk) 03:32, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the review - I hope to address these issues within the week. Sincerely, Novickas (talk) 11:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

How are things progressing on this article? I see that work has been done, but an update by the nominator here would be great! Dana boomer (talk) 15:34, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

It has a family section now. No one even takes a guess at his mother, but absent a ref saying outright "his mother is unknown"...I think the reader can infer that from the context. Images re-aligned; citation-needed statement removed. So would welcome a re-review. Thx, Novickas (talk) 16:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Further comments:

• In the lead you say he was crowned King in 1251 (first sentence) and 1253 (4th sentence).
• The lead could stand to be a bit longer. For an article of this length the lead should be 2-3 paragraphs...right now it is two but the second is fairly scant.
• Rise to power section, "The Lithuanian victory in the Battle of Saule temporarily stabilized the northern front with the Christian orders, but they continued to make gains along the Baltic coast, founding the cities of Gdansk (Danzig) and Klaipėda (Memel)." I'm assuming the "they" in the second part of the sentence refers to the Christians as opposed to the Lithuanians, but please make this clear.
• Assassination section, "The Livonian Order used this period to gain control over Samogitian lands." I would still like to see "this period" clarified to show exactly what period is being discussed.
• Legacy section "known family relations end with children; no historic records mention his great-grandchildren". What about grandchildren? There is a bit of a jump here from children to great-grandchildren.

The article is looking very good, and I am very impressed with the new family section. Once the above comments are taken care of, this article should be in good shape for GA status. Dana boomer (talk) 01:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

• Dates resolved - using 1236 for Grand Duke, since that is the first written mention.
• Lead expanded.
• Prose ambiguity in rise to power section addressed by rewording.
• "Gaining control in this period" issue addressed by rewording and adding Klaipeda Castle detail.
• Ambiguity in descendants sentence addressed by removing great-grandchildren clause. Used the ref'd known relations end with children and no relations with Gedimininids. Novickas (talk) 21:02, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Everything looks good with the article, so I am passing it to GA status. Very nice work! Dana boomer (talk) 21:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Labai Aciu! Now I can go on Wikibreak. I got the impression, rightly or wrongly, that you knew a fair amount about this era/region already, wow. Best wishes, Novickas (talk) 21:47, 24 February 2009 (UTC)