Talk:Crusader states/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Chris troutman (talk · contribs) 20:32, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

1. Well-written:

(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.

2. Verifiable with no original research:

(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);

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; 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. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(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.

Review

1. Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)		Undetermined
(b) (MoS)	Per WP:SUBCAT remove the Crusades category. Removed 2A00:23C7:4E01:9C01:8DAC:7A18:2882:2838 (talk) 16:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)	Undetermined

2. Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	Cite 112 (p81 of Prawer) doesn't support that text. Cite 116 (p 382 of Prawer) doesn't support that text. Cite 120 should extend to p395 of Prawer. Cite 123 (pp104-105 of Prawer) doesn't support vacancy, high mortaility rate, or nobility's combined holdings. Cite 124 doesn't support your list of magnates or royal power being abrogated. Cite 158 (327-333, 340-341 of Prawer) doesn't support the assertion about Egypt. Cite 119 (p76 of Boas) doesn't support the glassmaking claim. The source says the main summer crops were sesame, chickpeas, and millet. It also mention leguemes which you left out. Cite 54 (pp133-134 of Cobb) doesn't support the text. Cite 36 of Jotischky doesn't support the "advocate" title. Cite 43 (pp67,76 of Jotischky) doesn't support absence from Syria. Cite 59 (p89 of Jotischky) doesn't support the clain of rapprochement. Cite 70 (pp96-98 of Jotischky) doesn't say who William's cousins were nor does it say Sibyl was pregnant.	Undetermined
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	The "research has focused" sentences cited to MacEvitt aren't supported and that citation should be pp149-151. The Latin Kingdom's High Court was Curia generalis and this cite should extend to p114. Cite 10 should only include p42 of Jotischky. Cite 47 (p79 of Jotischky) says nothing about Charles the Good; that's on page 74.	Undetermined
(c) (original research)	Cite 135 of MacEvitt only cites jurists like John of Iberian while your text says "jurists" and then employs a phrase not in the quote from John. In the demography section you might specify Druze near Tripoli, Lebanon; cite 101 of Prawer says the mountains around Sidon. Regarding planned villages, the 3-50 number should be 3-40. Cite 42 (p69 of Jotischky) says that Asbridge asserts that Alexios wanted Antioch under pronoia; I don't know if that lines up with "structures of Byzantine rule" but would be OR to say so.	Undetermined
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	COPYVIO detector says it's fine; I'll keep my eye out. Cite 130 from MacEvitt is close paraphrasing. Cite 164 of MacEvitt is more close paraphrasing; "win the goodwill of the natives" is a quote from Munro, why is it italic? Cite 118 (p354 of Prawer) is more close paraphrasing. Cite 132 (pp104,112 of Prawer) is close paraphrasing and is unrepresentative of the text. The Curia in Jerusalem resembled earlier contemporary Medieval courtsd rather than develop the machinery of government found in the West at the time. Cite 141 is almost a COPYVIO of Prawer p252. Cite 147 is COPYVIO of Prawer p468.	Undetermined

3. Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined
(b) (focused)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
The reviewer has left no comments here	Undetermined

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
Editing but no edit war	Pass

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	yep	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	I'm not an expert on this, but they look passable.	Pass

Result

Result	Notes
WTF!?	Sadly, I cannot complete this review and therefore withdraw. My sincere apologies to the nominator for my failure. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:22, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

I've been reviewing this article offline, so the voluminous recent edits haven't made that easier. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:56, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Hm, yes Chris troutman, I will pick up your comments in the next day or so to help it move along. 2A00:23C7:4E01:9C01:5C8B:7905:975:B8AD (talk) 08:52, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

2a

• Cite 112 (p81 of Prawer) doesn't support that text.
• Cite 116 (p 382 of Prawer) doesn't support that text.
• Cite 120 should extend to p395 of Prawer.
• Cite 123 (pp104-105 of Prawer) doesn't support vacancy, high mortaility rate, or nobility's combined holdings.
• Cite 124 doesn't support your list of magnates or royal power being abrogated.
• Cite 158 (327-333, 340-341 of Prawer) doesn't support the assertion about Egypt.
• Cite 119 (p76 of Boas) doesn't support the glassmaking claim. The source says the main summer crops were sesame, chickpeas, and millet. It also mention leguemes which you left out.
• Cite 54 (pp133-134 of Cobb) doesn't support the text.
• Cite 36 of Jotischky doesn't support the "advocate" title.
• Cite 43 (pp67,76 of Jotischky) doesn't support absence from Syria.
• Cite 59 (p89 of Jotischky) doesn't support the clain of rapprochement.
• Cite 70 (pp96-98 of Jotischky) doesn't say who William's cousins were nor does it say Sibyl was pregnant.

Actions to follow 2A00:23C7:4E01:9C01:385B:DDCC:837:BA46 (talk) 16:49, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

2b

• The "research has focused" sentences cited to MacEvitt aren't supported and that citation should be pp149-151. - to follow
• The Latin Kingdom's High Court was Curia generalis and this cite should extend to p114. - done 2A00:23C7:4E01:9C01:8DAC:7A18:2882:2838 (talk) 17:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
• Cite 10 should only include p42 of Jotischky. - to follow
• Cite 47 (p79 of Jotischky) says nothing about Charles the Good; that's on page 74. - done 2A00:23C7:4E01:9C01:8DAC:7A18:2882:2838 (talk) 17:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

2c

• Cite 135 of MacEvitt only cites jurists like John of Iberian while your text says "jurists" and then employs a phrase not in the quote from John. In the demography section you might specify Druze near Tripoli, Lebanon;
• cite 101 of Prawer says the mountains around Sidon.
• Regarding planned villages, the 3-50 number should be 3-40.
• Cite 42 (p69 of Jotischky) says that Asbridge asserts that Alexios wanted Antioch under pronoia; I don't know if that lines up with "structures of Byzantine rule" but would be OR to say so.

Actions to follow 2A00:23C7:4E01:9C01:385B:DDCC:837:BA46 (talk) 16:53, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

2d

• Cite 130 from MacEvitt is close paraphrasing. - can you quote the paraphrasing please, the editing has moved the cite number?
• Cite 164 of MacEvitt is more close paraphrasing; "win the goodwill of the natives" is a quote from Munro, why is it italic? - italics changed to quotes, ok?
• Cite 118 (p354 of Prawer) is more close paraphrasing. - reworked
• Cite 132 (pp104,112 of Prawer) is close paraphrasing and is unrepresentative of the text. The Curia in Jerusalem resembled earlier contemporary Medieval courtsd rather than develop the machinery of government found in the West at the time- reworked and cited to different pages
• Cite 141 is almost a COPYVIO of Prawer p252. - reworked
• Cite 147 is COPYVIO of Prawer p468 - reworked

That completes 2d (MacEvitt excepted), unless you have found more. 2A00:23C7:4E01:9C01:5C8B:7905:975:B8AD (talk) 09:48, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

References