Talk:Ivan I of Moscow/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Mellk (talk · contribs) 14:35, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Borsoka (talk · contribs) 14:19, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
- 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:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Hi, I hope your nomination will be a success for both of us. Failing an article is always a failure for the reviewer as well. I love medieval Russian history. Borsoka (talk) 14:19, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
Image review
- File:Ivan Kalita.jpg: a source is needed and US PD tag is missing at Commons.
- File:Печать Иван Калита.JPG: a source is needed and US PD tag is missing at Commons.
- File:Духовная грамота Ивана Калиты.jpg: the source link cannot be opened and US PD tag is missing at Commons.
- File:Facial Chronicle - b.07, p.446 - Death of Ivan Kalita.jpg: US PD tag is missing at Commons.
- File:Simon Ushakov - Древо государства Московского (Похвала Богоматери Владимирской) - Google Art Project.jpg: US PD tag is missing at Commons. Is this picture highly relevant in the article's context? Borsoka (talk) 14:42, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
Source review
- Mainly academic sources of high standard are cited.
- Either mention or delete the place of publication at each title in the bibliography.
- Fennel: Why is the full date necessary? Why "Univ"?
- Gorsky, Kuchkin, and Shaikhutdinov: could you add an issn to each title? Borsoka (talk) 14:42, 13 February 2025 (UTC)