Wikipedia:Peer review/Manuel I of Trebizond/archive1

Manuel I of Trebizond
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because... well, I've put a lot of effort into creating a comprehensive article on a subject most references don't provide as much information. I'd like to think it could become a FA, but I doubt I have the patience to take it that far, so I'll stop if it reaches as far as GA. Anyway, I know there are points in this article that need polishing or improving, so I'm asking for input on the writing of this article, how well the information is presented. And if you happen to be an expert on the Empire of Trebizond -- although an esoteric portion of Byzantine studies, there are a few of them out there -- feel free to correct the facts or suggest further sources on Manuel Megas Kmonenos.

Thanks, llywrch (talk) 06:08, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

A few copyediting comments, not a complete review. (Note that I'm just copying text without links.) This is my understanding of what reviewers are looking for at FAC; you're free of course to disagree. - Dank (push to talk)
 * "was Emperor of Trebizond from 1238 to 1263": There's nothing in the lead to tell readers where that is. I'd go with: was Emperor of Trebizond, a small empire on the southeast coast of the Black Sea, from 1238 to 1263.
 * "Michael Panaretos describes": Same here. Readers can click through, of course, but they usually don't, and we're trying to make things easier for the reader here, so: Michael Panaretos, a medieval Greek historian, describes
 * "describes Manuel as "the greatest general and the most fortunate", and describes him "reigning well and virtuously in the eyes of God."": A rule of thumb is to avoid repetition when possible, and it's possible here. One option is: describes Manuel as "the greatest general and the most fortunate" who was "reigning well and virtuously in the eyes of God." Another is: ... and also says he was ....
 * "However, the only event he documents for Manuel's reign is a catastrophic fire striking Trebizond in January 1253": "However" has so many different senses that it's a less-than-useful term, but as the first word of a sentence, it generally means "The following counterbalances or negates the preceding". I don't see how a fire negates his status as a good general or emperor. If the contrast you want to set up is in the nature of "He describes Manuel as a great general and emperor, but gives no details of his military service or reign", then it would be helpful to say that.
 * "Trebizond": You don't need another link to Trebizond (even though the first link goes to the empire).
 * "in 1254, ... forty years before in 1214.": I'd go with: ... forty years before.
 * The lead isn't quite long enough to summarize the article.
 * I got down to the end of the lead. - Dank (push to talk) 22:02, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Overall it is a very good article, I found it very interesting. I do have one minor suggestion: in the section on Manuel and the Mongols, the second paragraph discusses his loyalty to one faction of the Mongols vs the other. However, the first paragraph indicates that he fights and then surrenders to the Mongols, without indicating which of the Mongol factions the fight and surrender were with. If that could be clarified, that would make the section flow more easily. 1bandsaw (talk) 18:36, 29 April 2014 (UTC)