Talk:Nikephoros Phokas Barytrachelos/GA1

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

Reviewer: West Virginian (talk · contribs) 17:28, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

, I will complete a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any comments or concerns in the meantime. Thanks! -- West Virginian   (talk)  17:28, 21 April 2015 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

, you've written another phenomenal and comprehensive article illustrating the biography of a notable Byzantine person. This article meets all the criteria for Good Article status, but I just had a few comments and concerns below that must first be addressed prior to its passage to Good Article status. Thanks again! -- West Virginian   (talk)  17:48, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Lede and overall
 * Per Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article stands alone as a concise overview and summary of the article. The lede defines Barytrachelos, establishes context for Barytrachelos, explains why Barytrachelos is notable, and summarizes the most important points of Barytrachelos' life.
 * "He" is used extensively throughout the article when referring to Barytrachelos. I recommend consistently and sporadically utilizing "Barytrachelos" "Nikephoros" or "Phokas" to name the subject of this article, especially at the beginning of the "Life" section.
 * Is there enough biographical information/data to cobble together a info box template at the top of the article?
 * The lede is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this section.

Life lede
 * As stated above, try to replace "he" with Phokas or Barytrachelos as appropriate so that the article isn't inundated with the usage of "he."
 * I'm assuming we don't have available information about Barytrachelos' mother or his place of birth?
 * This subsection is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this subsection.

Role in the revolts of Bardas Phokas and Bardas Skleros
 * When Skleros flees to the Muslims, are these Turks or Arabs? This is just a product of my own curiosity.
 * Deceived may work better here rather than tricked.
 * The miniature of the Clash between the armies of Skleros and Phokas is released into the Public Domain and is therefore acceptable for use here.
 * This subsection is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this subsection.

Rebellion with Nikephoros Xiphias and death
 * The miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes used in this subsection is released into the Public Domain and is therefore suitable for use here.
 * This subsection is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no comments or suggestions for this subsection.


 * Hello West Virginian and thanks for your kind words. I've made various copyedits both in response to your suggestions (thanks!) and to smooth out a few parts. On the infobox, given the rather fragmented record of his life, I don't see it being very suitable and hence little benefit in having it, but feel free to import one if you think it helps. Aside from the prose and other technical criteria necessary for GA, how do you feel it reads to someone who (presumably) is not familiar with the era? Is it comprehensible or should I put more context in? Cheers, and thanks again for taking the time to review this! Constantine  ✍  20:58, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Constantine, I've thoroughly re-reviewed your article and I find that you have incorporated several of my suggestions and addressed some of my questions listed above. The info box too was merely a suggestion, and it is not a deal breaker for passage to Good Article status if you decide to leave one out. I noticed that you successfully incorporated a few more tweaks for greater flow of the article's narrative. I assess that you've provided enough detail and context for the reader to understand Barytrachelos' actions and motives outlined in the prose. You may want to state the reason Xiphias was plotting against Basil II, which is outlined in the Xiphias article. You could also make it clearer that Barytrachelos and Xiphias sought to take advantage of the fact that Basil II was tied up in his campaign against the Georgians. With all that said, I find that this article meets the criteria for Good Article status, so it is hereby a pleasure for me to pass this article to GA status! Constantine, thank you as always for your thorough research and well-written articles. -- West Virginian   (talk)  21:21, 21 April 2015 (UTC)