Talk:Michael Bourtzes/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
The article has no disambiguous links. I also ran it through AWB and it came up clean there as well.

The article doesn't have the persondata template and I recommend adding it.

Done.

One of the Sources is out of order for Cheynet, I think this one should go on top above the Holmes source.

Done.

Is there any more data we can put in the infobox like battles, branch?

Well, there is the Siege of Antioch and the Byz. civil war, but these would be redlinks, for the moment. As for the branch, that is not really relevant for the Middle Ages...

Ihave added the major battles/campaigns...

In the sources section you have a reference for Trombley, Frank. This reference does not appear to be used in the article at all and as such shoudl be moved to a further reading section.

Done, I had forgotten to add some more info from it.

I understand that the details might be sketchy but is there any additional info about where he was born or died, his ancestry, what he did after he left the military. The article seems to concentrate specifically on the military career.

This is because he is known only through his military feats. AFAIK, there is nothing "after".

In the start of the career section I think you should just use hi last name rather than his full name.

I chose to use the full name to avoid confusion, otherwise it would read: "Bourtzes is the first prominent member of the Bourtzes family"...

Since its a rather short article I also recommend adding in a little more detail about his family. You state that he was the first prominent member of the Bourtzes family and I think it might be interesting if you expand on that a little bit if possible.

I intend to write a small article on the family with the info the ODB gives, possibly even tomorrow.

You use his name a lot Bourtzes did this or that. Since we know who the article is abotu I recommend you eliminate some of theh named references to him with he, him, etc. It will help the article to flow a little better.

I tried to weed out the redundant references. I'll check the article over tomorrow to see if more can be done.

In the second paragraph you said he "threw in his lot". I recommend rewording this to say something like "he allied himself".

Done.

The article ends with him being dismissed, what happened to him after that. If nothing is known then that should be stated.

Done.

Other than these items it looks like a very good article and I found it to be a very interesting read. Reviewer: Kumioko (talk) 04:16, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thanks for taking the time for the review. Your concerns have been noted, but due to Easter I won't be able to tackle them until next week. Regards, Constantine ✍ 05:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it took so long to get back to you on this. I think the article looks a lot better know and so I am going to promote it. There are still a couple of things that I recommend though and they are: There is a reference in the lede and typically the lede should be reference free because the references and the data they reference should be in the body of the article. In this case the dates of what appear to be his birth and death dates. The last sentence that you added is a little confusing and I think it needs to be reworded for clarification. Other than those two things good job. --Kumioko (talk) 00:43, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]