Wikipedia:Peer review/Parâkramabâhu I/archive1

Parâkramabâhu I
Greetings all. I totally rewrote this article over the course of about three months and now think its ready for the world! Nominated it for FA but have been told it could benefit from a peer review too. This is my first article on this scale so please be gentle, but any constructive criticism and/or help would be appreciated! Thanks. DocSubster 00:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * References go after fullstops. ex 'edicts and monuments still extant in Sri Lanka today.[3] M3tal H3ad 12:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Done!DocSubster 15:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

From SG
You've done an impressive amount of work in a very short time, and have an excellent start. I haven't had a close look at the prose or read the entire article, as I'd like to see the structural things addressed first. Sandy (Talk) 19:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * 7 Death & legacy Pls see WP:MOS, no special characters in section heading.✅
 * 8 References, 9 See Also, 10 External links Pls see WP:LAYOUT for suggested order of appendices.✅
 * Please expand external links to include descriptive titles rather than [number]✅
 * One of the See also is not capitalized. Can any of those be worked into the text?  Anything that is already linked in the text need not be included in See also.✅
 * The placement of the infobox at the end of References is strange - see WP:LAYOUT✅
 * The prose may need a complete run-through by a fresh set of eyes - here is the first thing I glanced upon:
 * At any rate the brutal suppression of the rebellion appears to have worked; apart from another, brief, rebellion in 1160, Ruhuna remained quiet for the rest of his reign. ✅
 * The "at any rate" is redundant, appears to have worked sounds weasly, and the sentence is uncited. Another example - is this a typo?  Parakramabahu also continued his programem of hydraulic works begun in Dhakkinadesa, ... Section heading "Construction work", work is redundant.✅
 * Specifying sources as the first part of the article is strange. Information about sources should be in the footnotes - that's a strange way to start the article.✅
 * "It is important however not to dismiss the Culavamsa wholesale – ..." According to whom? This sounds like opinion, and we shouldn't tell encyclopedia readers what to think - we just report on what reliable sources say.✅
 * Please expand all blue links in References to bibliographic entries. Entries also need publishers, publication dates, and ISBNs where possible.
 * Mixed reference styles are used - most use cite.php ref tags, yet the direct quotes use inline references.
 * The image and quote placement in War with Bagan, 1164 - 1165 creates a large white space - the article also seems to rely heavily on quotes. See WP:QUOTE
 * A lot of the article is sourced to Culavamsa - can you broaden your sources?
 * Have a look at WP:LEAD - the lead should be a two to four paragraph summary of the article.
 * Mini-comment The article seems short on categories, for example someone probably needs to start a category from List of rulers of Sri Lanka. Toppy6 18:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ t 21:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Copy+paste the document into MS Word or use any other spell-checking device (I believe Firefox 2.0 has one, the Google Toolbar also offers one). The PR script (click on the link above) caught 14 spelling errors, which is a lot considering the limited scope it has (rather unfortunately, it is the most I have ever seen too). ✅
 * Suggest a heavy copy-editing; the first sentence in the lead thoroughly baffles me. Parakramabahu I, born c. 1123 in Dhakkinadesa; reigned 1153 – 1186; died in Pulatthinagara; also known as Maha Parakramabahu (lit. Parakramabahu the Great); a medieval king of Sri Lanka who ruled from Polonnaruwa. Problems: over-bolded (birth/deathplaces shouldn't be bolded), doesn't meet WP:MOSDATE guidelines (the birth/death years belong in parentheses), and isn't even a sentence (it’s a combination of fragments listed together without an "and"). Plus, wiki-link Sri Lanka for those who have never heard of it before (though I can't understand why they would be looking at this article anyway then…).✅
 * The second sentence is simply asking for a citation – usage of WP:PEACOCK and weasel terms.✅(the intro does not need citations)
 * Parakramabahu unified the whole of the island under his authority somehow seems to be largely redundant to me (the whole of, under his authority).✅
 * Randomly picked paragraph, mouse over to see my suggestions: The politics of Lanka played an inevitably significant role in Parakramabahu's upbringing, commencing with the controversial marriage of his eldest sister, Mitta, to Sri Vallabha's son Manabharana of Ruhuna. Queen Ratnavali disapproved of the marriage, which was 'forced' by Sri Vallabha for fear that Mitta would secretly be dispatched to Polonnaruwa to marry Vikramabahu's heir Gajabahu.[11] Ratnavali thus has complex loyalties amidst this maelstrom of rivalries; though the wife of a king of the Arya branch she desired her daughters be married to the Kalinga heir to the throne. It was also during this time that Parakramabahu would have met his future mahesi Lilavati, who would rule Lanka in her own right after he died - she was Sri Vallabha's daughter. AZ User talk: 22:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC) ✅

Changes
First up, thanks to Sandy and AndyZ|t for taking such an in-depth look at the work - I really appreciate the time you've taken and am learning as I go. I have made the following changes as per your suggestions: DocSubster 11:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Rewrote the introductory para, changed 1st sentence, removed peacock phrases.
 * Attempted to remove all peacock phrases and weasle words from the article.
 * Attempted to make the text clearer and more comprehensible.
 * Re-organised article as per Wikipedia guidelines.
 * Included extended bibliography, with ISBN where applicable (many of the texts used are quite old however and do not appear to have ISBNs -?)
 * Changed External Links section to incorporate descriptive text into link, and added links to online versions of some of the sources used.
 * Removed discussion of sources from article altogether (placed it in 'Culavamsa' article).
 * Edited spelling mistake -very embarassing but I've always had problems with the 'i' and 'e' thing, and I went to school in the UK my entire life...oh dear.
 * Placed pictures such that they do not create a large blank space (except the first one, which is caused by the contents menu)DocSubster 12:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Known issues
Sandy (Talk) 16:52, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately the articles is going to have to be Culavamsa-heavy as it is pretty much the only primary source for Parakramabahu's reign, apart from rock inscriptions.
 * I have no idea how to start categories. Ideally I'd like to start a proper 'history of Sri Lanka' so if anyone is interested in getting the project going with me please let me know.
 * I'm not sure what 'Mixed reference styles are used - most use cite.php ref tags, yet the direct quotes use inline references' means, could you please elaborate Sandy?DocSubster 12:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I've converted your inline refs to the consistent style (cite.php) used in the rest of the article.
 * I also converted your named refs: whenever you use the same source more than once, using a named ref results in only one line in the footnotes - please see my diffs as to how to do that, and check to see if any of your Culavamsa sources are repeats and could be handled with named refs.
 * I also converted all of your footnotes to a consistent style (last name).
 * I left several inline comments for sources which are listed in footnotes but not in References - Wickramasinghe, Mahavamsa, and I think one other ?
 * Some of your references are missing information - readers need to know how to track down these books. Author, title, publisher, publisher location, publisher date, and ISBN (when available) should be given on all of your references - some info is missing.
 * You've changed your appendix section heading to something that is different than WP:LAYOUT. Can you please put footnotes in Notes, references which are cited in the article in References, books which are not used in the article in Further Reading, and lastly, web sources which are not used in the article in External links?  The headings are mixed, References are in something called Bibliography, and some of the entries in Bibliography appear to be Further reading, as they don't seem to be used as sources.  You also had links to sources included in External links - those aren't EL, they are sources.  Please review all of this per WP:LAYOUT.
 * I changed this myself - pls check.
 * Readers need to know where to locate Culavamsa - it's not listed in your References, only extensively footnoted. If all of the Culavamsa references are actually to Geiger, that needs to be clarified in the Footnotes - they should see Geiger.
 * The article is still almost entirely sourced to Culavamsa, so this needs to be somehow dealt with. Can you diversify more of your footnotes, to reference some of the other publications?
 * I haven't yet looked at the prose and peacock issues.

Once all of the above is addressed, the article should have a thorough check of Wikilinking. The first link I clicked on was incomplete, and a redirect (From Rajaraja I's invasion of 993 till the reign of Vijayabahu I (1055 - 1100), ... ).  The first occurrence should be linked, and unimportant terms shouldn't be linked. There is also a typo in the very first line [Parakramabahu I(Sinhala: Maha Parakramabahu, Parakramabahu the Great; 1123 – 1186)] (no space before the parenthesis), suggesting that a thorough copy edit is still needed. Here is another sentence that indicates the need for a thorough copyedit by a fresh set of eyes: Upon being informed of the child's birth, orders are sent from Vikramabahu in Polonnaruwa that the boy be sent to be brought up as his heir. Sandy (Talk) 18:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * It's looking a lot better already :). The article still needs more wikilinking (esp. sections like "The conquest of Rajarata", "Youth").
 * Copyediting an article is a difficult process- User:Tony1 has a comprehensive guide to doing such. I'll show some more random examples:

Thanks guys for all the work you've done on this. It strikes me that a 'fresh pair of eyes' is needed, which excludes me; is anyone willing to give the article a copyedit?DocSubster 13:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * (caption) A temple in Polonnaruwa bearing a striking similarity to Khmer architecture. Parakramabahu's subjects were and ethnically and religiously varied populace, as is reflected in the make-up of his army.
 * The only other rebellion of Parakramabahu's reign occurred in the region of modern Mantota in from 1168 - 1169.
 * On this occasion however Lankan help came too late; by the time Parakramabahu's general Lankapura arrived in Pandya Nadu, Kulasekhara had captured the capital Madhurai killed his wife and children; his son Prince Virapandu however had managed to escape. Rather than head for Madhurai Lankapura landed in the vicinity of Ramanathapuram and captured the city of Rameswaran, which was to be in Lankan hands for the next thirty years or so.[5] Here they built a fortress called (confusingly) Parakramapura. In this early phase of the war they fought Kulasekhara on several occasions, eventually laying siege to him in Madhurai and seizing the city. Virapandu was restored to power, but apparently only as a puppet, as the Lankan army under Lankapura remained in Madhurai and continued to engage the Chola across south India.[66]
 * by the absence of Parakramabahu's army, and his most formidable general Rakkha when there are only 2 items in the list, ====Copyedit?====