Talk:Voivode of Transylvania/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 13:06, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take this one. In the next few days, I'll do a close readthrough, noting here any issues I can't immediately fix, and then begin the criteria checklist when some or all of those points have been addressed. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:06, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Initial readthrough

This looks like a very solid article with impressively thorough research. I'll do some checking later for the broadness criterion, but I can't imagine there's much I'll be able to add here.

I did some minor copyediting as I went, so please double-check me to be sure I haven't accidentally changed the meaning or introduced errors. I won't be offended if you revert some of it.

A few minor points:

• Is it necessary to italicize voivode? It appears in English-language dictionaries as a word without the italicization: [1], [2]. (It's even a word in Scrabble: [3].) "vice-voivode" and "voivodeship" are particularly confusing in making it appear to be a blend of English and non-English in a single word. My own preference would be to not italicize it, but if the article is going to make this a rule, it should also be capitalized in the title and first sentence. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:18, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
• The wikilink for "jurors" appears to go to the wrong term (members of a jury); "jurist" seems closer to the meaning here ("the word "jurist" can technically be applied to anyone having a thorough knowledge of law").
• " they held their courts " -- is the "they" here the voivodes, or the voivodes and jurors together?
• " In the following period, even the existence of "voivodal dynasties" (Ioan-Aurel Pop) can be proposed" -- the "can be proposed" feels a little odd here. Would you object to rewriting the sentence as "Ioan-Aurel Pop characterizes the following period as including "voidvodal dynasties":"?
• "brothers of Count Peter Szentgyörgyi (1498–1510);" --different start date than his entry in the table -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:18, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
• " royal authority in Transylvania was only restored by Thomas Szécsényi in the 1320s" -- should the footnote for this go to page 144 instead of 133?[4] Just spotchecking a few sources.

Dear Khazar2, thank you for your review. I agree with all your above suggestion (so I hope I succeeded in implementing them). The last one is the only exception: I think page 133 is the proper reference. Please double cheque it. Thanks again. Borsoka (talk) 19:36, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I can't see p. 133 in the Google Books preview; I just saw similar content on 144 and wanted to double-check. So don't worry about that one. Thanks for your quick responses, particularly in the de-italicizing, which I know was a chore. -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:40, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. 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:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. 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).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. 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:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass