This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Croatia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Croatia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CroatiaWikipedia:WikiProject CroatiaTemplate:WikiProject CroatiaCroatia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hungary, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hungary on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HungaryWikipedia:WikiProject HungaryTemplate:WikiProject HungaryHungary articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
This article was copy edited by Onel5969, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 1 October 2014.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
Some of the references mention a work entitled "Deeds of Frederick Barbarossa", but it is not listed in the "Sources" section. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:06, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
John of Reading, thank you very much for the above message. I added the source. Borsoka (talk) 12:46, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: Several images had some blank parameters and so didn't explain why they can be used in the US, but I went ahead and fixed those, as that was a minor issue.
Overall: Overall, the article is good. I have only a minor question that I feel should be resolved before the article is approved. See the section below.
Pass or Fail: I'm requesting a second opinion Passed.
In the quote from The Deeds of Frederick Barbarossa, the word "the" is duplicated, followed by "[sic?]". The question mark is what I'm unsure about - is it standard to use it in this case? I checked out WP:QUOTE, MOS:QUOTE, and Block quotation, and none of them addressed this. However, MOS:QUOTE says that trivial spelling and typographic issues can be corrected without comment, if doing so does not damage the textual integrity of the quote. I think that this instance would qualify, so I recommend just removing the extra "the" and the "[sic?]" comment.--¿3family6contribs 20:48, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
John of Reading, maybe you can help clarify here as to the best approach, since you added the comment?--¿3family6contribs 21:02, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@3family6: The best solution for this would be for someone to access the source and check the quote. Failing that, I wouldn't object if the correction was declared to be trivial enough for the MOS:QUOTE rule to apply. I'm not consistent myself; sometimes I make the correction and sometimes I tag with [sic?]. The correction here should be from "the the" to "that the" to make the grammar of the sentence come right. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:11, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm... that might affect the textual integrity. Perhaps just remove the question mark? You or some other editor, such as Borsoka, will have to make that edit, though. I can't per GA reviewing rules.--¿3family6contribs 21:15, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your remark. I fixed the text in accordance with the cited source. Borsoka (talk) 03:16, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks better now, but I want a second opinion on whether it's okay to correct the mistake, or keep sic without a question mark.--¿3family6contribs 04:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I do not understand. I fixed the problem in accordance with the cited source: there is no sic in the cited source and there was no "the the" text in the cited source either. Why do we need a sic? Borsoka (talk) 04:20, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, so the mistake was in the writing of the quote here on Wikipedia? Sorry, I didn't catch that. We're set, then.--¿3family6contribs 04:22, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]