Talk:Seneb/GA1

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

Reviewer: Sagaciousphil (talk · contribs) 16:12, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll have a look at this over the next few days as it looks like an interesting topic.  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  16:12, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * It's not often I come across an article that I don't find at least one typo in, but couldn't detect any here. No copyvio problems were indicated.
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * Other than the two listed below, the only other refs I cannot get at least a good preview of are: Treasures of Ancient Egypt; and Wooden Statues of the Old Kingdom but both are listed on Google, so I consider refs are sufficiently verifiable. However, there are just a couple of refs to clarify for me, please:
 * When I try to access ref#3 (Egyptian Art in the Age of the Pyramids) via the isbn it comes up as invalid. However, I did find this which seems to give me access. Could you double check it for me, please? Same for ref#17 (Understanding hieroglyphs: a complete introductory guide) which I'm finding here
 * Looks like someone has just run AWB and sorted the two refs mentioned immediately above already (Thanks, Mr Stephen).  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  10:51, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * C. No original research:
 * Looks like someone has just run AWB and sorted the two refs mentioned immediately above already (Thanks, Mr Stephen).  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  10:51, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * C. No original research:


 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * Covers the subject well.
 * B. Focused:
 * Remains topical without deviation.
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Complies with neutrality policies.
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * No signs of any problems in the article history.
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * Both images are creative commons - and are featured pictures as well.
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * Captions are relevant.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * As I'm still very much an inept novice at reviewing GA nominations, I will ask someone with a little more in-depth experience to give this review a double check when they have time - it is really for me to learn more about my reviews, so please be understanding of this. It will help me identify any areas of my review which need to be addressed. This is a fascinating article!  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  10:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * As I'm still very much an inept novice at reviewing GA nominations, I will ask someone with a little more in-depth experience to give this review a double check when they have time - it is really for me to learn more about my reviews, so please be understanding of this. It will help me identify any areas of my review which need to be addressed. This is a fascinating article!  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  10:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Requested second opinion
Hi Prioryman, Phil asked me for a second opinion. I agree that the article looks strong and ripe for promotion, and it's a fascinating topic. Thanks a lot for your work on this. I have a few quibbles that I wanted to suggest; it's up to Phil, of course, whether any of these are really important. (I'm not sure they are myself, but thought I'd mention them.)
 * " Despite his diminutive size..." " His successful career and the lavishness of his burial arrangements are indicative of the high status accorded to dwarfs in ancient Egyptian society." --if dwarves were awarded high societal status, then should the previous sentence still say "despite his size"?
 * I know what you're getting at, but what I'm trying to highlight implicitly is the contrast between modern and ancient Egyptian attitudes. We wouldn't today expect dwarfs to hold high-status positions in society (unless you're talking about Peter Dinklage...) so the fact that Seneb was a high-status dwarf is unexpected - a "despite" situation - to modern eyes. This wording is intended to acknowledge that. Prioryman (talk) 20:28, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * "priestess of normal size" -- normal (and by implication abnormal) may be a touch loaded here. What about saying "of average size"? This seems to be the phrasing our article on dwarfism uses.
 * Fair point. I've changed it. Prioryman (talk) 20:28, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * "The mastaba tomb " -- Since this isn't a common term, would it be possible to add a quick explanatory footnote for context about what this is "A mastaba is a flat-roofed, rectangular tomb"
 * Good idea, done. Prioryman (talk) 20:28, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I might have looked past it on my quick read, but is the sentence "His successful career and the lavishness of his burial arrangements are indicative of the high status accorded to dwarfs in ancient Egyptian society." supported by the body?
 * I've reworded this, see what you think of it now. Prioryman (talk) 20:28, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. Thanks for taking a look at these. -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again! Congrats on another quality article. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:45, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you both for your help with this - I'm now promoting this to GA status.  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  08:11, 25 April 2013 (UTC)