Talk:Gelou/GA1
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
GA Review
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Tezero (talk · contribs) 05:59, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
Tezero, thank your for your review. Please find my comments below. Borsoka (talk) 06:41, 30 December 2014 (UTC) Comments:
- You might want to list the languages of foreign-language sources in the citations using the "|language=" parameter; I see at least one in Romanian and one in Hungarian.
- Sorry, I do not understand your remark. Both sources (Kordé 1994, Sălăgean 2006) contain the "|language=" parameter. Borsoka (talk) 06:41, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Huh, I guess I didn't notice it since it's at the end. Never mind. Tezero (talk) 06:43, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, I do not understand your remark. Both sources (Kordé 1994, Sălăgean 2006) contain the "|language=" parameter. Borsoka (talk) 06:41, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- What's the relevance of most of the "Transylvania on the eve of the Hungarian conquest" section? Gelou isn't mentioned by name at all until the end.
- As per WP:NPOV, I think, we should provide a background (based on scholarly works) of the alleged principality of Gelou which takes into account not only the sole source of Gelou's life (the late 12th- or early 13th-century Gesta Hungarorum), but also sources for the late 9th and early 10th century history of Transylvania (including archaeology). Reliable sources cited in the article also applied this approach (I refer to the works written by Madgearu of Gelou's alleged duchy). I suggest that we should follow those scholarly works to avoid WP:OR. Borsoka (talk) 06:41, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- If you really think all of that's necessary, then maybe, but WP:OR has nothing to do with how much information's included, only with what conclusions can be drawn from what's covered in the sources. Tezero (talk) 06:43, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for your understanding. Yes, I would prefer following the specialists' approach. All the same, you are right, it has nothing to do with WP:NOR. Borsoka (talk) 07:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- If you really think all of that's necessary, then maybe, but WP:OR has nothing to do with how much information's included, only with what conclusions can be drawn from what's covered in the sources. Tezero (talk) 06:43, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- As per WP:NPOV, I think, we should provide a background (based on scholarly works) of the alleged principality of Gelou which takes into account not only the sole source of Gelou's life (the late 12th- or early 13th-century Gesta Hungarorum), but also sources for the late 9th and early 10th century history of Transylvania (including archaeology). Reliable sources cited in the article also applied this approach (I refer to the works written by Madgearu of Gelou's alleged duchy). I suggest that we should follow those scholarly works to avoid WP:OR. Borsoka (talk) 06:41, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Are there any estimates about Gelou's years of birth and death? I can gather that it was sometime in the 10th century, but anything beyond that?
- In the reliable sources cited in the article, there is no such an estimation. Borsoka (talk) 06:41, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
I'll be back to review the rest later. Tezero (talk) 05:59, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Tezero, thank your for continuing your review. Please find my comments below. Borsoka (talk) 06:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Alright, so is it "Gesta Hungarorum" or "the Gesta Hungarorum". Either's fine, but pick one.
- I picked "the Gesta Hungarorum" version. Borsoka (talk) 06:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Why is "imaginary figure" in quotes?
- It is a verbatim citation from Engel's work. Borsoka (talk) 06:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- But is it really worth quoting? It's two words; that's hardly plagiarism. Alternately, just replace "figure" with "person" or "imaginary" with "nonexistent". Tezero (talk) 06:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- OK. Quotes deleted. Borsoka (talk) 06:38, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- But is it really worth quoting? It's two words; that's hardly plagiarism. Alternately, just replace "figure" with "person" or "imaginary" with "nonexistent". Tezero (talk) 06:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- It is a verbatim citation from Engel's work. Borsoka (talk) 06:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- "giving the right hand of their own free will" - What does this mean? Just that they conceded? If so, the quote's probably unnecessary.
- I deleted the text. Borsoka (talk) 06:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- What does "Eskellő" mean? "Place of swearing"? Is it a place named after "someone who swears"? Just the verb "to swear" doesn't tell everything.
- Actually, Eskellő does not mean anything in (modern) Hungarian, but Anonymus connected it to the Hungarian word for "oath". I modified the sentence to clarify this. Borsoka (talk) 06:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- "Gelou was named after Gilău (Gyalu in Hungarian), a Transylvanian village in which Gelou dies in the Gesta" - Why isn't this village mentioned earlier, when the article's actually describing his death and its aftermath?
- Text added. Borsoka (talk) 06:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- What's the etymology of "Geloupara", if applicable? I know that Thracian is some kind of Indo-European language, but nothing beyond that.
- I added Djuvara's translation. Borsoka (talk) 06:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- The article makes inconsistent use of the Oxford comma - e.g. "Spurs, weapons, and other Frankish objects" vs. "Iernut, Tărtăria and other Transylvanian sites". Again, either's fine, but pick one.
- I opt for not using ",", with the exception of one sentence, which is a verbatim sitation. Borsoka (talk) 06:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
That should be it. I haven't read through every part of this in depth but it looks alright to me, so I'll pass it if these are addressed. Tezero (talk) 05:45, 31 December 2014 (UTC)