Talk:Artabanus I of Parthia/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 22:54, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


On my list. Give me a few days. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:54, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Schippmann, K. (1986b) is not used as a source.
  • The "Name" section needs at least one cite.
  • "Determining the dates of Phripatius' reign" This is marginally poor English, and doesn't explain why he must have been old. Could you consider rephrasing?
  • "refrained from using the title of "King of Kings" in his coinage" And why is this worthy of mention?
  • "in order to establish friendly relations with their Greek subjects" It wasn't in order to establish friendly relations. You need a different word. Or a minor rephrasing. (Maybe something like 'as part of a policy of maintaining friendly relations with their Greek subjects'?)
  • "Artabanus I's reign was a period of decline in the Parthian Empire" This may be correct, but from context I think that you mean {{'}for the Parthian Empire'.
  • "Phraates II had died fighting the invading nomads" Delete "the".

Gog the Mild (talk) 20:17, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: Hi again and thanks for reviewing two of the articles I've nominated. Think I've fixed all the issues now. --HistoryofIran (talk) 22:50, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite 1: the page numbers don't match those in the bibliography.
  • "The Modern Persian version is Ardavān (اردوان)." is uncited.

Gog the Mild (talk) 09:31, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Fixed.
  • I don't really have any source other than my own knowledge of the language (it's also spelled 'Ardavan' in the Persian Wiki, if that makes any difference), so I've removed it for now.

--HistoryofIran (talk) 11:33, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pity, but if it can't be cited, then it shouldn't really be in a GA, no matter how *obvious*. Nice work on tweaking the wording in response to my comments above. Promoting. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:29, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed