Talk:Codex Coislinianus/GA1

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

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 14:32, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Lead


 * The reader needs to know where it is currently in the lead, you should mention at least a few of the actual libraries they are found in in Paris, Athos, Petersburg etc.


 * The lead doesn't adequately sum of the entire article, needs more history info, even if only brief. According to Eberhard Nestle it is "one of the most valuable manuscripts" is also important and should be mentioned in the lead. Can you expand the lead?


 * History


 * "The codex was probably written in the 6th century at the library in Caesarea, later coming into the possession of the monastery of the Great Lavra on Mount Athos, but its value appears to have been overlooked." Citation needed.
 * "He made a few mistakes corrected by Tischendorf. " Do we have a full name and link for Tischendorf? Ah yes "It is cited in the printed editions of the Greek New Testament since Tischendorf's edition." Tischendorf needs to be linked in the first part and delinked in the second part.

I have expanded the lead and added some references. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 18:21, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

Looks satisfactory now.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:37, 24 November 2011 (UTC)