Talk:Basiliscus (Caesar)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 14:51, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I'll get to this shortly. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:51, 22 January 2023 (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):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Lead:
 * Generally I've seen "Eastern Roman" or "Eastern Roman Empire"?
 * Fixed; I think I just put Byzantine on instinct, my mistake.
 * "although the historian Brian Croke considers this an attempt by Victor to explain the existence of a living Leo, as this was possibly the younger Basiliscus' regnal name, rather than historical truth." I think it'd be less confusing as something like "although the historian Brian Croke does not accept this as true, considering this an attempt by Victor to explain the existence of a living Leo, as this was possibly the younger Basiliscus' regnal name."
 * Done.
 * Background:
 * "she turned against him once he became sole emperor" the last male mentioned was Leo II, so "him/he" here is confusing
 * done
 * "fled to his native Isauria" we don't need "his native" here
 * done.
 * This section is heavy on details that probably aren't very helpful to an understanding of the caesar Basilicus - is there a way we can condense some of it down to keep the article focus on the caesar? An example - "Emperor Basiliscus quickly lost support in Constantinople, through a combination of heavy taxes and heretical ecclesiastical policies, as well as a natural disaster, wherein a large fire broke out in the quarter of Chalkoprateia. As Bury remarks, the fire served as all "accidents in superstitious ages always help...to render his government unpopular". Many at the time viewed the fire as a symbol of divine wrath against him." could be summarized as "Emperor Basiliscus quickly lost support in Constantinople, due to heavy taxes, heretical ecclesiastical policies, and a natural disaster which was viewed as a sign of divine wrath against him."
 * Done; happy to take more suggestions on trimming, but there's an unfortunately hard balance between useful context and losing focus, given that Basiliscus the younger was mostly a bystander and object of history, rather than doer.
 * Caesarship:
 * "explains that it was Zeno's wife Ariadne who interceded on his behalf as a result of their family ties, as she was cousin to Armatus" the "his behalf" is unclear here
 * Done.
 * "or if he remained bishop at the time" time of what? Death? or something else?
 * Done.
 * Possible relationship with Leo II:
 * "offers a potentially more reasonable explanation" this appears to be a conclusion reached by the editors of the article - since it is sourced to Croke.. it should be made clear if it is a conclusion by a secondary source or removed.
 * Source says "this story is not an obscure and wilful invention which can be used to impugn the integrity of Victor, but is capable of reasonable explanation", from which I drew the "potentially more reasonable explanation"; do you feel that these two are too dissimilar? Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  17:26, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I randomly googled three phrases and only turned up Wikipedia mirrors. Earwig's tool shows no sign of copyright violation.
 * Spot checked :
 * "Emperor Basiliscus quickly lost support in Constantinople, through a combination of heavy taxes and heretical ecclesiastical policies, as well as a natural disaster," which is sourced to this site which mostly supports the information - the source says "He was forced to make strong financial impositions to support the war against Zeno." which isn't exactly "heavy taxes" but probably close enough.
 * I've added a cite to Friell and Williams, who say that he imposed "ruthless tax measures". Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  17:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * "wherein a large fire broke out in the quarter of Chalkoprateia." is sourced to Bury online here which supports it but I'd suggest rewording slightly to "broke out in the Chalkoprateia quarter of the capital" to avoid too close paraphrasing (it's close but probably okay now, but rewording a bit more won't hurt)
 * This bit was trimmed off, so re-wording is no longer necessary.
 * "Many at the time viewed the fire as a symbol of divine wrath against him" is sourced to this source through the wikilibrary which it supports.
 * 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) 15:33, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Believe I have responded to or addressed all comments. Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  17:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I copyedited a bit more in the first paragraph of the background section, and this looks good to go. Sorry for the slight delay, our weather turned a bit nasty and I had outdoor chores that ate a bunch of time. Passing this now. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I've added a cite to Friell and Williams, who say that he imposed "ruthless tax measures". Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  17:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * "wherein a large fire broke out in the quarter of Chalkoprateia." is sourced to Bury online here which supports it but I'd suggest rewording slightly to "broke out in the Chalkoprateia quarter of the capital" to avoid too close paraphrasing (it's close but probably okay now, but rewording a bit more won't hurt)
 * This bit was trimmed off, so re-wording is no longer necessary.
 * "Many at the time viewed the fire as a symbol of divine wrath against him" is sourced to this source through the wikilibrary which it supports.
 * 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) 15:33, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Believe I have responded to or addressed all comments. Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  17:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I copyedited a bit more in the first paragraph of the background section, and this looks good to go. Sorry for the slight delay, our weather turned a bit nasty and I had outdoor chores that ate a bunch of time. Passing this now. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)