Talk:Yam fortress

Image needed?
Ok, I was ready for anything but not that. wich type of image does it need? Because I'm pretty sure that existing images in that article illustrates fortress in a best way possible: drawing of fortress when it existed, plan of fortress and few photos of remains. If you know what can I add to it, please specify. Thanks in advance. Red wanna talk? 07:58, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Sourcing of some sentences could be indicated more clearly
I considered trying to undertake the Good Article Review (presumably with input from more experienced editors, as it would be my first GAR), but may not have the ability to easily read the Russian sources; nonetheless, I wanted to bring up one issue that stood out. Many sentences throughout the article do not have citations (directly) after them. For example, in It was built in 33 days, and its construction seems to have been very important to Novgorod. A chronicler says that, "all the nobles of Novgorod" took part in the process. Five kochansky voivods (heads of districts) led the construction.[2], am I right to infer that [2] (Кирпичников p. 181) is the source for all of the sentences? I don't want to nitpick, and I have seen articles which took that approach (and perhaps it is the result of other editors preferring that approach?), but I think this would be better indicated by repeating a short name+year+page-sfn after each sentence (or using &lt;ref name="foo"/&gt;), to make it more obvious what the source of each sentence was and to future-proof the article s it requires less constant vigilance to keep the sourcing intelligible going forward: as things stand, if someone were to change the first of those sentences to It was built in 33 days. The principal building material was foobar.[entirely new source] Its construction seems to have been very important to Novgorod., the connection between "It was built in 33 days" and [2] would be lost. -sche (talk) 16:17, 31 December 2020 (UTC)