Talk:George Mouzalon/GA1

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

Reviewer: Lankiveil (speak to me) 07:30, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles must meet six criteria to become GA articles. I have reviewed this article on all six below. Generally speaking, this article is quite good, but a bit of extra polish won't hurt at all.

I'm putting this on the standard one-week hold, but it shouldn't take that long to bring it up to snuff. Again, good work! Lankiveil (speak to me) 08:07, 29 May 2010 (UTC).
 * 1) Well-written:
 * Generally speaking, the article is well written. A few little things that might be tidied up:
 * The subject of the first couple of paragraphs of the "Early life and service under Theodore II" section is a little unclear. It jumps between talking about George, and then his brothers, then all of them specifically.  Pick one of these viewpoints (probably George's), and stick with it.  For instance, talk about "his" sisters, not "their" sisters.
 * "The mob however perceived its error"; 'perceived' may not be the best word to use here. A simpler word like 'realised' is probably preferable.
 * "It was a sham: a conspiracy by the leading aristocratic families ...", try to rewrite this without using the colon mark. While technically correct, using unusual punctuation in this way can sometimes confuse the reader.
 * "Their houses were ransacked by the mob; and when George Mouzalon's wife, fled to her uncle Michael Palaiologos and pleaded for her husband, she was brusquely told to be quiet or she would share his fate.": consider whether every comma is required here. It might also be a good idea to clarify who "Their" refers to here; since you've just been talking about Theodore Mouzalon and Andronikos II Palaiologos just before that.  It's reasonably clear from context, but you can never make things clear enough.
 * 1) Factually accurate and verifiable:
 * No big issues, but the article does rely fairly heavily on three sources from Geanakoplos, Makripoulias and Macrides. Are these the only historians who have written about this individual?  More diversity in the sources would be an improvement.  This isn't going to stop the article going to GA, it's just a general observation.
 * 1) Broad in its coverage:
 * The article goes into some detail on Mouzalon's murder, but is quite short on detail from Mouzalon's life and career. We know why people wanted to kill him, but we don't learn about anything he did while working in the court of Theodore II.  What policies and achievements was he involved with?  You later state that historians generally take a positive view of his work, but a reader of this article still won't know what that work was.
 * 1) Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
 * No problems noted. The article covers multiple viewpoints that historians have concerning this person.
 * 1) Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
 * No problems noted.
 * 1) Illustrated, if possible, by images:
 * Both images used are of decent quality and have the appropriate licencing.
 * A picture of Mouzalon himself would help, if there is one available.


 * First, thanks for taking the time to review this. Now, to the specific issues raised: on the change of perspective you mention in the first section, I did tweak phrasing on a couple of occasions, but I cannot really avoid treating them collectively in some instances, because saying "George and his brothers" would get somewhat repetitive and redundant. I addressed (hopefully) the other style points you mentioned.
 * As for the sources and his participation in the governance of the state, there exists no dedicated biography on him. Geanakoplos is the only work on Michael VIII's life, and Macrides is the latest edition of Akropolites' history. There is also the history of Pachymeres, but the latest edition (in French) is not available to me, but Macrides helpfully does point out where Pachymeres differs from Akropolites. Then there is also Angold's A Byzantine government in exile on the Nicaean empire, but again, not accessible at the moment and, IIRC, also restricting itself on his regency and murder. I have used Makripoulias mainly to fill out on some gaps or provide additional verification.
 * There is not enough information provided on how he affected policy. He was certainly a willing aide to Theodore II's policies, the major outlines of which (suppression of the nobility, a "national" army, etc) have been mentioned here too. But it is impossible to say what specific measures were initiated by him, because no source mentions anything of the sort. The "positive" view ("positive" would be perhaps too much, "neutral" or "non-judgmental" might be more correct) by modern historians consists in that they do not accept Akropolites slanders of him and his brothers as shameless flatterers and yes-men to Theodore II but as able ministers in their own right, who agreed with and carried out the emperor's policies faithfully. A picture of Mouzalon would be great, but there is to my knowledge none extant, which is not surprising given the short time in which they enjoyed prominence and the subsequent damnatio memoriae. Any other issues? Cheers, Constantine  ✍  12:23, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * First, please let me apologise for taking so long to get back to this, affairs outside of my control and outside of Wikipedia took up more of my time in the past week than I had anticipated. Given the changes that have been made to the article and the remarks above, I'm now happy to promote this article to GA.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:44, 6 June 2010 (UTC).
 * Thanks again for your time. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  12:31, 6 June 2010 (UTC)