Talk:Mudéjar revolt of 1264–1266/GA1

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

Reviewer: Auntieruth55 (talk · contribs) 15:07, 13 June 2018 (UTC)


 * I'll start this in the next couple of days. auntieruth (talk) 15:07, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Minor tweaks here please review!
 * Thanks! Most of them look good, and I added some minor adjustments. HaEr48 (talk) 01:06, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * the last sentence of first paragraph of "Background" is partially uncited. ....which became the principal centers of this rebellion.
 * I improved the referencing of that sentence. I didn't add first because the centers of the rebellion are the basic facts of the article cited somewhere else, but I agree it's better to cite it explicitly. HaEr48 (talk) 01:06, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I think the background would be strengthened by including something on why there needed to be a reconquest in the first place: that the Muslims had conquered the Iberianpeninsula in the 6-8th centuries; that the constant infighting in the peninsula resulted in alliances between Christians and Muslims, Muslims andMuslims and Christians and Christians; and that, by the 11th/12th/13th centuries, the hardening of Christian and Islamic ideologies into crusade and jihad added a zealous religious element to conflicts. You can probably extract some of this from the article on the Reconquista. auntieruth (talk) 15:57, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I see. I need to consult sources on this, but I am currently travelling with limited internet connection, which makes this difficult. Can you give me about 1 or 2 weeks? HaEr48 (talk) 01:06, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure, ping me whenyou get to it.  :)  auntieruth (talk) 15:59, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the understanding. Managed to get this done today (diff), please take a look and let me know if there's more I can do. HaEr48 (talk) 06:15, 27 June 2018 (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):
 * see notes above
 * 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 fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * Thanks for the review and for making some copyedits. Please see my comments above. HaEr48 (talk) 01:06, 23 June 2018 (UTC)