Talk:Barhebraeus/GA2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
GA review
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: Hogshine (talk · contribs) 06:42, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: A.Cython (talk · contribs) 00:33, 12 February 2026 (UTC)
I read the article. It is a biography of an intriguing personality who produced an impactful series of works that echoed over centuries. There is definitely genuinοus effort to improve this article. Unfortunately, I have to quick fail this one based on WP:GAFAIL#3, which states: It has, '''or needs,''' cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include {{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags (See also {{QF}}) (emphasis added).
- There are at least 5 cases (a few too many) where citation needed tag can be placed.
- There are a couple of whole paragraphs without any inline citations.
The latter is a serious omission, because one of the criteria for Good Article, i.e., WP:GACR6#2, is about verifiable content. No citations means no way for us to verify, which leads to automatic failure. Advice for the future: make sure to have a relevant citation at the end of each paragraph in the main body (lede excluded). To make clear where citations are needed, I placed citation needed tags in the text.
Also from a quick read, I would suggest to avoid repeating information in the article. There are several other minor issues that need to be addressed. For example, you mentioned twice how he died, repeating the quote "Nestorians, Armenians, and Greeks". I suggest for you to familiarize with the WP:MOS and to find a mentor to help you with the WP policies and manual style (check the Wikipedia:Teahouse for advice and finding a mentor). A.Cython(talk) 00:33, 12 February 2026 (UTC)
- They do not appear to me as summaries, which is why I recommended to you finding a mentor. Extensive use of summaries in the main body should be avoided. IMO, the article has other issues in terms of prose, which are not easy to fix and I have not even tried to look the interpretation of sources. An article to be considered for GA must overall address these issues before hand. Happy editing! A.Cython(talk) 13:51, 12 February 2026 (UTC)