Talk:Ptolemy XII Auletes/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MrClog (talk · contribs) 20:30, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Will review the article within 7 days. --MrClog (talk) 20:30, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

First pass

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):

   I fixed some small spelling mistakes. Per MOS:CONSISTENCY, I made sure the article consistently uses British English.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Please see comments below.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Very good!

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:

   Please take a look at the comments below, and ping me if you fixed one or more, so I'll strike them. --MrClog (talk) 22:37, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Comments

• (2d) Copyvio: too much close pharaphrasing(?)
  • It looks like the links listed have copied from Wikipedia. Векочел (talk) 17:26, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

• Quite a lot of paraphrasing issues dealt with, but still some way to go. Amitchell125 20:03, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

• This appears to be the only instance left to be dealt with. --MrClog (talk) 21:44, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

• @MrClog: Seems that the link is copying content from Wikipedia. For instance it uses text from the lede of the Cleopatra article. Векочел (talk) 23:13, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

• After doing some research, I indeed did find out that the text was already on Wikipedia before it was on donsmaps.com.

• (2b) /Early life/ - Does cite 8 support the claim? "unkown not mentioned on p. 60 "uncertain" not mentioned on p. 60
  • I believe the fact that his birthdate is uncertain is mentioned on p. 60. See the following link: [1] Векочел (talk) 12:29, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
• (2b) /Family/ - Cite 21 does not mention page number. Anyone know which page number
  • Ive added the page number to the article. Векочел (talk) 12:22, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
• (2b) /Restoration and Second Reign (55–51 BC)/ - Cite 38 has no page 388
  • That seems to be a typo. The correct page is p. 338. Векочел (talk) 12:45, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
• (2b) Please make sure the citations use |pp= when there are multiple pages (including ranges), and |p= when there is only one page.

• p./pp. errors corrected. Amitchell125 14:43, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Succesful "good article" nomination

Now that all concerns above are addressed after the review was put on hold, the article has hereby succesfully passed its GA nomination. Congratulations! --MrClog (talk) 14:33, 19 May 2019 (UTC)