Talk:Jelena Lazarević/GA1

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 18:21, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to take this review. Initial comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:21, 25 April 2013

Three early comments, sorry that I got sidetrakced in the middle of this one. Will finish later tonight/tomorrow:

  • "They had one child, a son Balša III who was born in 1387" -- appears to be a repeat of information in the previous section checkY
  • " the Venetian dodge" -- should this be "doge"? checkY
  • "In front of Venetians Balša III, based on Jelena's instructions, protected the ancient rights of the Serbian church and the Zetan Metropolitan bishop appointed by the Patriarchate of Peć." -- I'm not sure what this means--was he physically standing in front of some Venetians? Or is the idea something like "on the Venetian front, Balsa..." -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:31, 25 April 2013 (UTC) checkY[reply]

More:

  • "by marrying his sister Jelena" -- is the "his" here Sigismund or Stefan's? I'm guessing Stefan's. checkY
  • "This marriage had important political consequences because Hranić" -- for clarity, it would be best to refer to him consistently as Sandlj or Hranic, rather than alternating.checkY
  • "Sandalj spoiled the relations with Hrvoje" -- spoiled whose relations? His own, I'm guessing?checkY

Two concerns

On first pass, this article appears well researched and well sourced. The two biggest concerns I have about this article so far are copyediting and context. It's very difficult going for the non-expert reader, and needs work on both respects to meet criterion 1a (clarity and correctness). I've done some copyediting as I went, but it's clear that more is needed, to a degree that I think falls outside the scope of a standard review. I'm able to fix some basic spelling, punctuation, and preposition errors, but some sentences I've had more trouble untangling, like :

  • "The purpose of her endowment was not only to be her crypt but to serve as the spiritual center which would take care about the historical orientation of the Serbian culture based on the Byzantine Orthodox spirituality in last period"checkY

or

  • "Jelena wrote her will on 25 November 1442 which shows that she had her own library and that in 1441 based on her instructions her chancellor Doberko ordered a book covers made of silver and decorated with image of Jesus from a goldsmith from Kotor named Andrija Izat"checkY

The article assumes a high degree of specialized knowledge from its reader, and would be clearer at times with a bit of context.

  • Is it possible to work in a few sentences of the political background of Jelena's time early in the article? I'm not saying that a standalone background section is needed, but it would be helpful to add sentences here and there like "This was a time when the Venetians were on the rise, and had come into repeated armed conflict with the Serbians." (This isn't necessarily true, just an example.)
  • "Battle of Tripolje" -- can you explain what this battle was? It doesn't seem to be with the Venetians per its article.checkY
  • " emperor Sigismund" -- would be okay to write "Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund" here for greater context?checkY
  • "This seriously weakened the position of Hrvoje whose niece Katarina was Sandalj's second wife" -- who are Hrvoje and Sandalj? Again, you might add a minor contextual phrase to the name of each when first introducing them.checkY
  • "Koja Zaharia" -- perhaps write "Albanian nobleman Koja Zaharia" or a similar contextual phrase checkY
  • "That way Jelena confirms her loyalty to the tradition of the Nemanjić dynasty and her father Prince Lazar in the period when she was able to make a political choice between Islam and militant Catholicism." -- this is the first time Islam is even mentioned in the article--can you give more context about what the context of this choice was?

Etc.

I'm going to put this one on hold for seven days for these concerns to be addressed. If you're not comfortable doing the copyediting yourself, you might consider asking at WP:GOCE for a copyedit; the article appears to need a thorough check. Hope these comments help, and thanks again for your work. The contribution is very much appreciated! -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:41, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review. I requested ce at GOCE and I will try to address the issues you mentioned. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:30, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Khazar2, I intend to deal with the issues you raised one by one and mark them with tick sign. If you think I did not actually resolve some of them please let me know. Can you prolong on hold status from 7 to 14 days because I will be travelling a lot during next week so I am uncertain how much time I will be able to dedicate to improvement of this article?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:46, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Holding another week would be no problem. Very sorry for my slow response! I managed to miss this one in following the conversation below. -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:49, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some copy-editing

Antidiskriminator, I made a few copy-editing changes and tried to improve the clarity of some of the prose. However, since I know just about nothing about this topic, I may have accidentally introduced some factual errors. Take a look at my changes; if you don't think it says what you think it should say, just bring it up on the GA review page and I'll try to help you make it say what it should say. Between my knowledge of the English language and your knowledge of Serbian history, I think we can make this work. AmericanLemming (talk) 23:42, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, AmericanLemming, for volunteering on this one--it's a big help! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:33, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to both of you. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:09, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments

As Khazar2 said, I think some context would help the non-expert reader get more out of the article. These are some comments I have after reading through the article.

  • She "significantly influenced the way" her husbands and son governed their realms. How?
  • "She was also known as a writer." I think it would help if you were to mention how important she was as a writer. Is she considered to be one of the most important figures in medieval Serbian literature?
  • "Jelena traveled to Dubrovnik." Why? Was her husband fighting there, or was she trying to get out of harm's way? checkY
  • "Jelena was firmly opposed to the pro-Venetian strategy of Durad II." Was it that he was pro-Venetian, or did he just want to co-operate with them so he didn't have to fight them?
  • "Jelena had a significant influence on the way Balsa III governed Zeta." How? It seems that she encouraged him to fight the Venetians rather than negotiate with them, but I think it would be clearer if you said that.
  • "Jelena traveled back to Zeta through Dubrovnik where she received 100 ducats worth of presents." Did she receive the presents in Zeta or Dubrovnik, and why did them give them to her? Because she had negotiated the peace treaty with the Venetians?
  • "left a deposit in Dubrovnik for the child they would eventually have." What kind of deposit? With whom did he leave it?checkY
  • "In September 1435 Jelena asked the Ragusans to allow her" Were the Ragusans in control of Dubrovnik, or did they just have influence there?
  • "lack of pope's approval" I presume you mean the Roman Catholic pope?checkY
  • "was praised as an extraordinary women" Who was she praised by? Her contemporaries? Later Serbian historians? Also, I guess I'm a little uncomfortable with the word "extraordinary." Could you maybe get a citation for this?
  • "her writing was highly evaluated" By whom? Contemporaries? Later scholars?

Other comments: These aren't necessary to get the article to GA status (or at least I don't think they are), but are just some ideas for further improving the article if and when you want to do that.

  • Why did she marry Durad II? checkY
  • Why did she marry Sandalj? To protect her son? checkY

AmericanLemming (talk) 02:07, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AmericanLemming, I intend to deal with the issues you raised one by one and mark them with tick sign. If you think I did not actually resolve some of them please let me know.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:47, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a look at what you've done so far, and I believe that your changes make the article a lot easier for the non-expert reader to understand. Keep up the good work! AmericanLemming (talk) 05:54, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You asked very good questions which really helped improvement of the article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:43, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And thanks to both of you for your work on this--I'll take another pass tonight or tomorrow and see if anything's left! -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:29, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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). Since the majority of the sources are non-English, I'm not as certain as I would normally be about the reliability of sources. However, I see no issues on an initial look, and the subject matter does not seem controversial.
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 as GA
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Jelena_Lazarević/GA1"