Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Daniel Vocatius

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 10 months ago by Vacant0 in topic GA review

GA review

[edit]

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.


This review is transcluded from Talk:Daniel Vocatius/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Governor Sheng (talk · contribs) 08:52, 6 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: Vacant0 (talk · contribs) 13:42, 22 July 2025 (UTC)Reply


Will review this as part of the ongoing DCWC contest. Vacant0 (talk contribs) 13:42, 22 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

I find it very interesting to read biographies of these forgotten religious figures of yours. I'll wait for you to send me the copies of the other three sources and I'll then perform a spot check. Overall, I won't fail this article because I feel like all of issues I've found can be quickly fixed. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk contribs) 11:16, 26 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Summary

[edit]
GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

· · ·

Comments

[edit]
  • The 2016 book is missing ISBN. Sources are reliable.
  • "sometimes Vocensis, Vocacensis or Vocacio" is unsourced.
  • Diocese of Muro Lucano is wikilinked twice in the lede. Remove the latter wikilink.
  • Introduce Ratko Perić.
  • "Friar Marijan Žugaj thinks" → "Friar Marijan Žugaj said"
  • Giulio Ricci predecessor is unsourced
  • wikilink Duvno's first appearance in the Bishop of Duvno section.
  • Introduce Daniele Ferlati.
  • "which included the territory in the Republic of Venice (present-day Croatia) and the Ottoman Empire (present-day Bosnia and Herzegovina)" is unsourced and only mentioned in the lede, and not the body.
  • "400 debt he owed to her husband" 400 of what?
  • "didn't" → "did not"
  • I was only able to find Melchiorri de Cerreto (1844) online but I cannot read Latin. This reference also seems to be only used once so it won't be of use. Do you by other chance have copies of the other three sources? I would specifically spotcheck Ref 1, 4, 5, 8, 10, and 13.
I'll need some additional time to adress this. Thanks a lot for taking this review! --Governor Sheng (talk) 13:50, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
No problem. Take your time. Vacant0 (talk contribs) 14:26, 31 July 2025 (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.