Talk:Second Intermediate Period of Egypt/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Merytat3n (talk · contribs) 00:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Starting review : ) Merytat3n (talk) 00:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Great! Many thanks. Hopefully we can improve this article. I am very interested in this period so I will endeavour to improve it in anyway possible. Thank you JJNito197 (talk) 11:34, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay here are my thoughts:

Easy fixes:

• The lead mentions Salitis but he isn't mentioned in the body text (lead should only summarise what is in the body of the article)
• Daressy 1906, Montet 1968, Morgan 2010, and Baker & Baker 2001 do not have a full reference.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   I found the text a bit unclear in parts due to how the information is presented. For example, the section "14th Dynasty" doesn't mention a single king by name; later, it mentions that Ben-Tor disputes Ryholt's chronology but doesn't give a chronology of rulers. This feeds into Section 3, with the text just being too short and incomplete.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   The references are for the most part good Egyptological sources. Requires some more frequent citations in parts (one at the end of each paragraph would be ideal). Earwig's copyvio detector noticed that "There is no agreement in Egyptology either about the length or about how to define the Second Intermediate Period" is from UCL's Digital Egypt, as is "mark the end of the Middle Kingdom as the 'historical moment' when the country became politically divided".

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The existing text is simply too short to cover the era sufficiently. The existing references could be used to flesh the sections out further eg. naming kings where possible, chronology, and political changes. Art and architecture, and introductions of Hyksos technology could also be included.

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

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

   The images used are good as are their captions but would be more effective if the individuals they illustrate also appeared in the text

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   It needs a lot more work to get to GA status but it's great you are willing to tackle it!! I look forward to seeing its progress! The Second Intermediate Period is not my area of expertise so in addition to the existing sources, I can only suggest Grajestzki's The Middle Kingdom of Ancient Egypt (2006) which has chapters dedicated to the decline of the 12th Dynasty and the 13th Dynasty. Merytat3n (talk) 10:51, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, will start work on the article over the weekend! JJNito197 (talk) 10:18, 12 January 2024 (UTC)