Talk:Cappadocian calendar/GA1

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

Reviewer: Attar-Aram syria (talk · contribs) 07:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

The six good article criteria
--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 07:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * 1-Well written:
 * a. the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and
 * Done.
 * b. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation
 * A valid point and that's what I usually do as well. However, this is a pretty small article about a minor subject. I found it pretty difficult to integrate lede material into the body of the article, as it became repetitive on almost every attempt. Hence I decided to keep it this way. However, if you do really think I should add some more lede material to the body, could you please describe it in detail (i.e. sentences/words.)? Thanks a lot.
 * Thanks. I kept your additions, which were definitely an improvement, and made a few more tweaks to fulfill the GA criterion. Please let me know what you think.
 * A valid point and that's what I usually do as well. However, this is a pretty small article about a minor subject. I found it pretty difficult to integrate lede material into the body of the article, as it became repetitive on almost every attempt. Hence I decided to keep it this way. However, if you do really think I should add some more lede material to the body, could you please describe it in detail (i.e. sentences/words.)? Thanks a lot.
 * Thanks. I kept your additions, which were definitely an improvement, and made a few more tweaks to fulfill the GA criterion. Please let me know what you think.
 * Thanks. I kept your additions, which were definitely an improvement, and made a few more tweaks to fulfill the GA criterion. Please let me know what you think.


 * 2-Verifiable with no original research:
 * a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
 * b. all inline citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;[5]
 * c. it contains no original research; and
 * d. it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.
 * c. it contains no original research; and
 * d. it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.
 * d. it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.


 * 3-Broad in its coverage:
 * a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
 * b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
 * Done. Please let me know what you think.
 * Done. Please let me know what you think.
 * Done. Please let me know what you think.


 * 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:
 * a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
 * b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
 * b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
 * b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Notes:
 * Done, I think.
 * Done, I think.


 * Done.
 * Done.


 * The Zoroastrian priests in Cappadocia apparently held some minor priestly autonomy, which in turn enabled them to "tweak" one element of contemporaneous "mainstream" Zoroastrian rite (i.e. the substitution of Apąm with Apąm Napāt). According to Boyce and Grenet, this minor change in rite is reflected in the eighth month name – apparently an unique trait of the Cappadocian calendar.
 * You're right; it does look kinda confusing. Should be better now. Please let me know what you think.
 * You're right; it does look kinda confusing. Should be better now. Please let me know what you think.
 * You're right; it does look kinda confusing. Should be better now. Please let me know what you think.


 * Done.
 * Done.

Thats it. Once my final remarks are answered, I will pass the article.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:59, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Just tweaked the article based on your final two points. By the way, I would like to get rid of at least one of those "According to Boyce and Grenet / Boyce and Grenet add (...)" passages within the "Names of the months" section. Its getting repetitive IMO. Do you perhaps have any suggestions on how to reword at least one of them? - LouisAragon (talk) 00:29, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * .--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 01:52, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! - LouisAragon (talk) 17:27, 28 April 2019 (UTC)