Talk:Bodashtart/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 14:59, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to this in a few. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:59, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Epigraphic sources:
- Link for "Temple of Eshmun"?
  Linked in the lead ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 09:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Link for "ashlar stones"?
  done ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 09:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- "A second set of inscriptions (KAI 16) were placed on restoration ashlar stones; these stones mention Yatonmilk and" might say "A second set of inscriptions (KAI 16) were placed on restoration ashlar stones; these stones mention Bodashtart and his son Yatonmilk and..." (at least I assume that KAI 16 also mentions Bodashtart since its implied strongly by the preceeding information)
  you're right; I took this passage lightly. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 09:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Geneaology:
- "Bodashtart hails from Eshmunazar I's dynasty" this is a bit unencylopedic in tone ... maybe "Bodashtart was a member of Eshmunazar I's dynasty"
  done. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 09:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm taking the non-English sources on faith, I have no way to evaluate their reliablity.
I'll be happy to answer any questions you have in this regard. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 09:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I randomly googled three phrases and only turned up Wikipedia mirrors. Earwig's tool shows no sign of copyright violation.

I did do some copyediting, please make sure I didn't change any sourced text beyond what the sources will support or that I haven't broken anything.

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ealdgyth: Thank you for your review Victoria. I hope I have satisfactorily addressed all the issues you pointed out. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 09:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]