Wikipedia:Peer review/Roman-Spartan War/archive1

Roman-Spartan War

This article has just failed a GA nom and I want to see what I can do to get it to GA further on FA. Kyriakos 20:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The lead reads like a classical tale, meaning there may be a lot of weasel words in the article. Start by removing 'overthrowing the legitimate king', you're not here to decide the proper bloodlines. Wiki-newbie 09:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I still believe that the initial wording "rightful king" was not POV. This characterization is legally and historically correct, based on the constitutional order and regime of Sparta. "Legitimate" becomes a bit POV. Maybe "king" alone would be satisfactory for everybody? I'll offer a detailed review later, but what the article needs more than anything now is a slight copy-editing by an outside English speaker copy-editor.--Yannismarou 08:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 22:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"They suggested Flaminius if he moved his camp closer to the city gates the Argives would revolt against the Spartans." I think this sentence needs rephrasing. I'm a bit confused with the syntax here. I'm not the most qualified to judge the prose, but, despite some flaws, it seems good. For FAC, I would definitely recommend another slight copy-edit by an external native English speaker copy-editor (as I almost always do!). For GAC ... I do not know any more!
Link properly your online sources. Check Template:Cite web and Template:Cite news.
More secondary sources would be a + for the article.
External photos is a nice idea, but the article still has only one map incorporated in it. Photos are not a prerequisite neither for FAC or GAC, but they do help.
When you have more than one citations in a row, they should be in the correct order. For instance not [19][14] but [14][19]. I fixed them in one section.--Yannismarou 20:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I like about this article: It is very well referenced and cited, which seem to be the two most important criteria these days for XAC. I especially love the use of external images. I think this is a highly innovative idea, which I really hope catches on. What I think could be improved..well Yannismarou, brings them up above. WORDING. Since I have a near native command of English, I will gladly help with the rewording:)--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 21:43, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]