Talk:Mushegh I Mamikonian/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 23:32, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

I'll get to this in the next couple of days...Ealdgyth (talk) 23:32, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

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):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

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 fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• Background:
  • Is there a link we can point "Iberian border" to? My first thought was the Iberian Pennisula isn't anywhere NEAR Armenia...

Ahh, my bad. Figured I would have out all of things at least linked that one. Yeah that's a classic one, it's actually referring to Kingdom of Iberia (present-day Georgia) xD. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:13, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

• Biography:
  • "with Pap bestowing Mushegh with many gifts, honors and villages." grammatically incorrect - either "with Pap many gifts, honors and villages on Mushegh." or "with Pap providing Mushegh with many gifts, honors and villages." would work.
  • I know you linked Cylaces but a quick phrase to say who he was and why he was important enough to be entrusted with the defense of the border? This way you don't lose your readers to another article.
  • The latter soon sent messengers to Shapur II, promising him to betray Pap, Mushegh and Terentius" This is a bit confusing on first glance - suggest "Cylaces soon sent messengers to Shapur, promising to betray Pap, Mushegh, and Terentius to the Persians."
  • Was Bat Saharhuni related to Mushegh? And was the new head of the family after Mushegh's death his son or other close relative?

Not sure if they had marriage links or something like that, but they were certainly from two different houses of Armenia (Saharhuni and Mamikonian). Faustus doesn't explain why the post was given to another house. I'm assuming it was to restrict the power and influence of the Mamikonians? Also they were relatives. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

• I randomly googled three phrases and only turned up Wikipedia mirrors. Earwig's tool shows no sign of copyright violation.

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:08, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

• Comment: Excuse me for the nuisance Ealdgyth. @HistoryofIran: The Syvanne source, cited in the "modern works" section should be deleted as it appears to be non-WP:RS.[1] The David Marshall Lang/Cambridge History of Iran source, also listed in the "modern works" section, a very good source, is not cited in the article. The Ian Hughes source (havent checked its quality) is also cited, but not used within the body of the article. - LouisAragon (talk) 14:51, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Damn, I see. I will fix that and the remaining issues in the upcoming days. --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:13, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ealdgyth:, whaddya think? --HistoryofIran (talk) 20:32, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Changes look good, passing now. Ealdgyth (talk) 21:55, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Primary sources

Hi Ealdgyth. Milhist has a bot which identifies and tags putatively B class new articles. Members later hand check its findings. I came across this one. Skimmed it, decided that its over-reliance on primary sources meant that it failed B1 "It is suitably referenced" and went to the talk page to downgrade it to C class. Oops, it has passed a GAN since the bot went by. And you were the reviewer. Was I being over harsh in my judgement, do you think? Gog the Mild (talk) 16:05, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I’m generally not a screamer at the GA level. Until the classics project stops doing their thing with primary sources, I really don’t see how I can hold a GAN to the same standards that a FAC would. There isn’t anything in the GA criteria that precludes use of primary sources, unfortunately, just that source pass WP:V and WP:RS. As long as interviews and news articles are accepted as RSs..there. It much I feel like I can do at the GA level. Ealdgyth (talk) 16:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

It was an open question. I may accept a serious report in a serious newspaper as RS. The 1,600-year-old account of Faustus of Byzantium, not. He doesn't, IMO, meet B1 "is suitably referenced", never mind GAN's "all inline citations are from reliable sources". But maybe I need to rethink that. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:52, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I did look at the uses of it, and about half the time it’s backed up by a second source. The other uses do not appear to be controversial information...but of course you’re welcome to open a GAR. That’s the problem with GAN, you can’t possibly get subject matter experts to do every review where they will know the sourcing perfectly...I can judge that Faustus is primary but not whether he’s an idiot or a good one. Personally I’d not allow any primary sourcing but that’s not the rules... Ealdgyth (talk) 17:19, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

A year late here. I agree, I regret using a primary source. Thankfully I cited the least controvertial info there was, but still. --HistoryofIran (talk) 01:06, 3 February 2022 (UTC)