Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ioannis Makrygiannis/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 20:59, 20 March 2007.

Ioannis Makrygiannis
Not really expecting this to pass, but since it passed A-class review at MilHist and GA review, as well as having had two peer reviews, it seemed logical to give it a shot. So, fire away! Go on and tell me just why this article sucks. ;) Druworos 23:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment "Starting from humble origins, he joined the Greek struggle for independence..." appeares to be a value judgement, which, if it wasn't in the lede, would need to be cited. As it is, I'd rephrase to simply describe his origins. Let the reader form his own judgements. -Fsotrain09 00:08, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Object Prose has many problems, including failing 1a, many unsourced statements, and many that violate WP:NPOV. Here's a sampling from the lede:
 * "Starting from humble origins" violates NPOV
 * "some notable victories." clean up prose. "Some" is superfluous (as is often the case), "notable" is POV. But we need some qualifier - where did he lead them to victories might be a good solution.
 * "tumultuous public career" POV, don't need this line
 * "merchant, military officer, politician and author." wfy
 * "important contributions to the political life" POV
 * "general Makrygiannis" capitalize
 * " is mostly remembered for his Memoirs." POV. who remembers? who says? cite
 * "his work has also been called a "monument of Modern Greek literature"" weasel words. cite, and even with a cite, it might be POV - pretty strong praise - just tell us what it said or what it influenced neutraly.
 * "pure Demotic speech" what does this mean? Is it a term? If so, link and cite. If not, may be POV.
 * "More than that, however," unnecessary
 * "its literary quality" subjective, need cite
 * "Makrygiannis, having been ignored by history," POV violation
 * "As mentioned, Makrygiannis concluded work on his" cut As mentioned
 * "The general's objectivity, however, has often been questioned" POV, cite
 * Please include ISBN's for all print sources. MarkBuckles (talk) 05:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I should point out that statements in the lead section do not need to be cited directly if the relevant citations are available in the parts of the article they summarize. Kirill Lokshin 15:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll agree to most of the comments above, just indicating that this: "his work has also been called a "monument of Modern Greek literature"" is actually cited to Seferis in the main body of the article. I'll agree a lot of the prose needs reworking. These should be more clearly attributed to Sphyroeras, who is the source of the comments: "The general's objectivity, however, has often been questioned"; "Makrygiannis, having been ignored by history,". Some of the phrases do need to go, I agree, such as this: "Starting from humble origins". ISBN for every single source could prove to be hard, especially as some of these are rather old. An honest attempt at it should be made though, I suppose. Thanks for all the comments on the prose and POV. What about content though? Cheers! Druworos 16:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

In general, the article has the potential to become a FA. It is well-written and well-cited. Nevertheless, some details should be worked, with a focus IMO on the lead (which must get a more professional prose), and "Assessment and significance of his literary work" which must get a better prose, a "to the point" expression and structure, and to get cleaned from "weasel" and "vagueness". Despite that, I do believe that this article can pass!--Yannismarou 12:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comments. First, you don't start a nomination with "Not really expecting this to pass"! If you don't expect to pass this, then you are in a wrong place here! Some remarks:
 * "achieving the rank of general and leading his men to some notable victories": I agree that this sentence does not properly illustrate his role in the War. Why were these victories notable?
 * "and later being sentenced to death and pardoned". What for? You could add two words here: "sentenced to death for this and this".
 * "Despite his important contributions to the political life of the early Greek state." Vague.
 * "this work has also been called a "monument of Modern Greek literature". You do explain this is the relevant section, so I don't think it is necessary to cite it in the lead. Per Kirill.
 * "was killed in a clash with the forces of Ali Pasha". Who is he? You and I know him, but not everybody here! Maybe it would be better: "was killed in a clash with the forces of Ali Pasha, the ruler of the western part of Rumelia".
 * You don't cite pages, when you use printed sources.
 * "It should be noted, however, that he condemned the assassination itself in the strongest terms." Avoid expression of the style "It should be noted...".
 * "Strategus Makrygiannis, Memoirs". I would propose to choose between "strategos" and "general" and stich on the term you choose.
 * "He was always outspoken about his views, and as a result he stirred negative reactions among his opponents." You should cite assessments like this one.
 * "Eventually, in 1852, he was accused of planning to "overthrow the establishments and assassinate the King"." What led to this accusations? The events here are a bit blur. What gave the opportunity to the King to accuse him? Definitely the pretext were not the events of 1843. Almost ten years had passed. There must be some other events which constituted the pretext or the reasons for the severe accusations and the sentencing.
 * "He was finally pardoned and released on September 2, 1854, thanks to the Crimean War. The blockade of Peiraeus by the French and British fleets also led to the imposition of Kallergis as Minister of War ..." I think "also" is useless here. You explain the previous sentence, and the "thanks to the Crimean War". So why do you need "also"?
 * "Makrygiannis suffered greatly in prison, and after his release suffered from hallucinations." Repetitive prose.
 * "It should be noted that Makrygiannis had received only the most basic and fragmentary education". Again "It should be noted".
 * "One could say that Makrygiannis was forgotten, not only as a fighter, but also as the author of a text written in adulterated Demotic Greek". What is "Demotic Greek"? Explain to the ignorant reader with a few words. This is very important for the section.
 * "Despite this, after the initial interest in the newly published Memoirs, they were hardly used as a source of reference for almost 40 years." I'm afraid bad syntax, and bad prose here.
 * "Makrygiannis, having been ignored by history, and hardly mentioned by chroniclers of the War of Independence, had renewed interest in the revolution by offering a significant personal testimony to historical research." Vague IMO and uncited.
 * "a text that, besides reproducing the heroic atmosphere of the War of Independence, is also a treasure-house of linguistic knowledge concerning the common Greek tongue of the time." Panegyric wording and uncited. In sentence, the whole paragraph here is problematic IMO. Not a clear line of thoughts; I fail to get the point; I see weasel and vague assessments. I think it should be rewritten in a more encyclopedic way.
 * "Makrygiannis was resurrected, so to speak ..." So to speak?
 * "Since then hundreds of essays have been written on the subject of his Memoirs, and it would be fair to say that the chronicler has overshadowed the fighter, and with good reason, according to Sphyroeras." Again, the sort of expressions you should avoid.


 * Withdrawn for the time being. I should like to withdraw this nomination at present, and thank everyone that took the trouble of looking at it. Useful comments that should be implemented, as soon as time allows. Again, thank you. Druworos 13:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.