Talk:Siege of Naxos (499 BC)/GA1

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


 * GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written:
 * Not Yet
 * 1) Longdashes should be used in the text, and there shouldn't be any spaces between them. I recommend going through the text and replacing any misused dashes (-) with longdashes (—). I know this sounds nitpicky but reviews are becoming increasingly tough on style issues like this.
 * Done


 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable:
 * Not Yet the sources need some formatting.
 * 1) The sources in the "bibliography" section should be put into templates.
 * Done


 * 1) The primary sources aren't cited like normal published books. I assume you found published works with translations of these sources in them (unless you actually have access to the original copies) these sould be cited.
 * The way the primary sources are cited is pretty standard practice for ancient sources. This makes the citation comparable across all formats, and not just for one edition of one book. In particular, almost all these citations are hyper-linked to a website containing the references (thus, there are no pages as such). However, I will add the information on the translations and their origin to the bibliography section, so that they can be cross-checked if necessary.


 * 1) For footnotes, the format for page citations is 'Name, p. #., per WP:FOOT (Sorry, content reviewers are particular about this, too.)
 * Done


 * 1) The quote "But you, what have you to do with these matters? Did not Artaphrenes send you to obey me and to sail wherever I bid you? Why are you so meddlesome?" needs a ref.
 * Done


 * 1) Aristagoras's actions have thus been likened to tossing a flame into a kindling box - also needs a citation
 * There already is a reference for this statement.


 * 1) It is broad in its coverage:
 * Pass No problems there.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy:
 * Pass No problems there.
 * 1) It is stable:
 * Pass No problems there.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
 * Pass No problems there.
 * 1) Overall:
 * On Hold while a few (mostly stylistic) issues are addressed. - Ed! (talk) 14:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * All right. The article now meets the Good Article criteria according to my interpretation of them. Good work. - Ed! (talk) 22:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)