Wikipedia:Peer review/Pelasgians/archive1

Pelasgians
I've listed this article for peer review because I think it deserves to be checked before going through a potential GA review. Moreover, a peer review will help to further augment the article's exposure to the Wikipedia community. This peer review in general is necessary in order to help the article progress and avoid further harassment from users who advocate certain varieties of propaganda that significantly lack evidence. The article is currently stable so I doubt that any assistance provided will be met with any serious levels of hindrance. I urge all users to provide any assistance whatsoever to ensure that every aspect of the article's content is accurate and based on evidence that is substantiated by verifiable/reliable sources.

Thanks,

Elysonius (talk) 13:07, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Comments from Lazulilasher:

Please note that I am far from an expert in this topic, however I decided to try and help by making a few comments:
 * First, the lead seems lacking and rather technical. I'd like to see some more context and background given on the subject which would be interesting to the reader without extensive knowledge of Greek history (for example, what significance does the Pelasgians being considered Greek have?). See WP Lead.
 * The word choice seems inaccessible to the average reader--example: does "autochthonous" have to used? (see last sentence, second paragraph).
 * Additionally, the article could use some copy-editing, which I would love to do, however I feel that I do not know enough about the subject to do so without substantially altering the meaning.
 * Maybe some more images could be found?
 * Some sources are cited parenthetically (example: (fragment 225)) whilst others are footnotes. It would be easier to read if they were all footnotes.
 * I would love to see some more context given -- for example: when discussing "Isocrates", I would like to know his significance so I would be better equipped to analyze the quote of his provided from Panegyric 23-5. To me, this is the largest area in which the article could be expanded. As it stands, the text is difficult for someone without intimate knowledge of Greek history to comprehend. Here are some further examples:
 * Strabo quotes Hesiod as expanding on the Homeric phrase, calling Dodona "seat of Pelasgians" (fragment 225); he speaks also of the eponymous ancestor of the Pelasgians, Pelasgus (Ancient Greek: Πελασγός), the father of the culture-hero of Arcadia, Lycaon. I had to look up the word "eponymous", additionally it is unclear what significance these facts have to the topic.
 * Herodotus, like Homer, has a denotative as well as a connotative use. As the reader, I am interested in what this means and its significance to the topic.

Overall, the article seems to be full of good information but could benefit from being edited into an easier to read style. Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 20:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)