Talk:Irghiz River skirmish/GA1

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

Reviewer: PizzaKing13 (talk · contribs) 04:34, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I'll take a look at reviewing this article. PizzaKing13  (Hablame)  04:34, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Images

 * Both images have proper licenses.

MoS, structure, coverage, and grammar

 * Lead
 * Add "the" before "Mongol conquest of the Khwarazmian Empire"
 * "On the Irghiz River, Aktobe Region, Kazakhstan" → "On the Irghiz River (modern day Aktobe Region, Kazakhstan)" as it makes reference to a modern place
 * Remove "Modern historians estimate" from both strength parameters in the infobox
 * I moved the article's three campaignboxes into the infobox
 * "in 1209 or 1219" → "1209 or 1219"
 * Use an en dash at "1220-21"
 * ✅ all done.


 * Chronology
 * "The battle is described, in varying levels of detail, by four separate chroniclers" → "The battle is described in varying levels of detail by four separate chroniclers" unnecessary commas
 * Use an en dash at "1215-6"
 * "highly suspect" WP:COLLOQUIAL(?)
 * "One historian, citing the fact" which historian?
 * "It is certain that" according to who?
 * "One theory suggests" who's theory?
 * ✅ all done


 * Battle
 * "assembled a force of his own, and rode to meet them" → "assembled a force of his own and rode to meet them" unnecessary comma
 * Done


 * "at least one modern historian" which modern historian?
 * Done


 * Who is De Hartog? Include his first name
 * Done


 * Who is Sverdrup? same as above
 * Done


 * "it is often cited" by who?
 * Everyone, and I do mean everyone. I've attributed it to Barthold
 * I see, alright.


 * What's the relevance of the quote?
 * To illustrate the Shah's reaction. It's not necessary, should I remove it?
 * I personally don't see it's connection to the events, and it isn't necessary for the article so it should be removed.

Overall

 * Coverage seems to be sufficient for what is known about the battle. It is interesting to me that we don't even know for certain what year it occurred in.
 * No war edits ongoing on the page.
 * Categories are good.
 * Article is well referenced.
 * Sources are reliable.
 * I saw that Category:1209 in Asia did not exist, so I created it and added it to the page.
 * Well written, no misspellings which I saw.
 * Article follows a neutral point of view.

Well done. This article is close to good article status, just a few edits and it should be able to pass this review. PizzaKing13  (Hablame)  05:17, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * have responded, thanks very much. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Looks about done, just the issue about the quote and I'll pass it. PizzaKing13   (Hablame)  17:37, 9 March 2022 (UTC)


 * , all ✅. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:47, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Very well done on this article, very interesting battle. I'll give is a pass to good article status. PizzaKing13   (Hablame)  20:18, 9 March 2022 (UTC)