Talk:Poverty in ancient Rome/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: Graearms (talk · contribs) 17:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 06:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will take this on. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 06:43, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

GA Criteria

GA Criteria:

1
1.a Y

1.b Y
2
2.a Y

2.b Y

2.c Y

2.d Y
3
3.a Y

3.b Y
4
4.a Y
5
5.a Y
6
6.a N

6.b Y

No DAB links Y
No dead links Y
No missing citations Y
Passes spot checks Y
Ref 101: Hands 1968, p. 54. Y

Ref 141: Bowes 2011, p. 9. Y

Ref 5: Osborne & Atkins 2006, p. 5. Y -- Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:22, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Apologies for the delay! For 6a: The files were missing a part of the licensure; as they need a license for both object and photographer. For File:Duble herma of Socrates and Seneca Antikensammlung Berlin 07.jpg and File:Roman Empire Apartment (2751806330).jpg, we have the copyright tag for the photographer of the photos, so I have added the relevant object tag, but for File:Sale bread MAN Napoli Inv9071 n01.jpg, we have the work tag but not author tag. From metadata, it appears to be CCA, and the author is tagged as the uploader, so I've reached out to them to clarify. For File:Roman harvester, Trier.jpg, I am struggling to find an older version, but with works that far back that is not always proof of originality. The poster seems to have had some issues with derivative work & copyright, so unless it can be identified that the work was posted under an acceptable license (which would be very difficult if not impossible), I think this work needs to be removed/replaced from the article. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 16:54, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would the file Mähmaschine.jpg be an acceptable substitute for the file Roman harvester, Trier.jpg? Graearms (talk) 19:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graearms: Yep! I have added the 3d tag for it. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:52, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Iazyges I have replaced the image. Graearms (talk) 18:56, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prose Suggestions

Please note that almost all of these are suggestions, and can be implemented or ignored at your discretion. Any changes I deem necessary for the article to pass GA standards I will bold.

The good reputation the wealthy would gather through these efforts allowed for them to gain favors from other wealthy Romans. In the Pro Plancio, a legal defense of Gnaeus Placius in 54 BCE, Cicero asks "Who ever can have, or who ever had such resources in himself as to be able to stand without many acts of kindness on the part of many friends?" it looks like the primary source is being used to cover the The good reputation the wealthy would gather through these efforts allowed for them to gain favors from other wealthy Romans. bit as well as the In the Pro Plancio, a legal defense of Gnaeus Placius in 54 BCE, Cicero asks "Who ever can have, or who ever had such resources in himself as to be able to stand without many acts of kindness on the part of many friends?" section; while the primary source is fine for the second portion, we would want an independent source for the first one.
Clement I, the Catholic pope from 88 to 99 CE seems easier to phrase this as Catholic Pope Clement I (r. 88–099).
All throughout, there is inconsistent titling of emperors, with some being called emperor on their first mention and others not. I would suggest standardizing to "Emperor [X]", and including reign templates, such as: "Emperor [X] (r. y–z)" on their first mention, and merely [X] afterwards.
I've fixed the more tedious bits (typos, grammar, duplicate links, duplicate refs, ref issues).
@Graearms: That is all my suggestions; once the ref piece above is resolved, I will pass the review. A very neat little article; I shall hope to see it at FAC. Apologies again for the delay! Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:25, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Iazyges: I should have fixed these issues in a few recent edits Graearms (talk) 22:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Passing now. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:40, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.