Talk:Menkauhor Kaiu/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tim riley (talk · contribs) 06:51, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Starting first read-through. More soonest. Tim riley talk 06:51, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

This is plainly of GA standard. May I make a few preliminary suggestions on minor aspects of the prose?

• Duplicate links: in the main text we have more than one blue link for each of: Khentkaus II, Sed festival, Wadi Maghara, Ra, temple to the sun, Sahure, mastabas, Ptahhotep, Horus Qemaa, New Kingdom period, Teti and Userkaf.

Y Done. Iry-Hor (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

• Attestations
  • "hellenized" – the Oxford English Dictionary (and the Wikipedia article) would have us capitalise the word.

Y Done. Iry-Hor (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

• • "A cylinder seal impression showing Menkauhor's horus name has also been unearthed in the pyramid complex of Nyuserre Ini, and in the necropolises of Giza and Gebelein" – this reads as though one seal impression has been found in three places.

Y Fixed! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

• Filiation
  • "The Czech Egyptologists…" – I shouldn't mention their nationality unless it is relevant. Same for Wilfried Seipel and Karl Richard Lepsius later in the text.

Y done. Iry-Hor (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

• Name
  • "The name of Menkauhor is in rupture…" – I see what you mean but this is not idiomatic English. You want something like "is in contrast with" or "is a departure from"

Y You are right this is a French idiom. I fixed it. Iry-Hor (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

• Duration
  • The citations at the end of the paragraph are not in numerical order.

Y fixed. Iry-Hor (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

• Funerary cult
  • "for their sustenance or their own funerary cult" – should "cult" be plural here?

Y Well spotted! Typo fixed. Iry-Hor (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

• Pyramid
  • "The motivations for this choice may lie in that the Abusir plateau had become overcrowded" – this is a bit wordy. Perhaps something like "The reason for this choice may be that …"?

Y Yes the phrasing was heavy, I changed it as you advocated. Iry-Hor (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

I have corrected a few typos and comma splices: please check you're happy with my changes. Tim riley talk 07:06, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Y I am very happy indeed! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   Well referenced.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Well referenced.

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   Well illustrated.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   Well illustrated.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

No complications here. A fine article! If you have plans to take it to FAC I advise you to go to peer review first: there are a few very minor prose tweaks I haven't thought it necessary to raise for GAN but which will need doing before FAC. Please ping me if you take the article to PR. Tim riley talk 10:39, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Tim riley Thank you very much for your help, I have put up the article to PR as you advised, see here. Iry-Hor (talk) 11:26, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

I'll be there in a day or two, and will see if I can press-gang some reinforcements. Tim riley talk 15:21, 17 July 2015 (UTC)