User:Johnwikster/Cylon of Athens/Revengemin Button Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

User:Johnwikster


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Johnwikster/Cylon of Athens
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Cylon of Athens
 * Cylon of Athens

Evaluate the drafted changes
1. The Lead Section

The article is quite brief, as such, the lead section is the first sentence. It does identify the subject of the page and what he was known for.

2. Clarity of Article Structure

The sections are well organized; the first sentence could be made into a more formal lead by making the subsequent paragraphs part of a new section entitled Attempted Coup or something. The map is also good, it provides context for what Cylon being the son of Theagenes might have meant, since Megara is so close to Athens.

3. Coverage Balance

There are no content balance concerns.

4. Content Neutrality

Some content neutrality/sourcing concerns: who recorded Cylon's supporters suffering famine and dehydration while holed up in the Acropolis (also, how long were they there); who said it is likely that Plutarch's story is a later invention; and who suggested that the skeletons are Cylon's supporters?

5. Sources

Sources are good, but John Henry Wright wrote in 1892, so there could conceivably be more recent information on dating or new sources, but the absence of such things from your draft suggests not. I think the in-text citations of Herodotus and Thucydides should probably be notes to match the normal citation style. Since the only (approximately) primary sources on Cylon are Herodotus and Thucydides, the fact that they provide most of the information is not problematic, because it has been specifically noted. Any discussion by a historian of the biases of either author, or Plutarch, on the subject of the Alcmaeonidae, their curse, and how that reflects on Cylon could be good additions, but may not be strictly necessary.