Talk:Ivan Ančić/GA1

GA review

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

Nominator: Governor Sheng (talk · contribs) 18:08, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: EF5 (talk · contribs) 16:20, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the late review, I was in Cincinnati all weekend and wasn't able to get access to a computer. I'll finish the review today to compensate. :) E_F⁵ 16:20, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Review, I'm a bit late:

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
See below.
It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
See below. Earwig only shows a 6.5% similarity ratio, which is far below copyright-vio levels.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
All good here, seems to cover everything.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
No neutrality issues.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
No protections, no disputes, no edit warring.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Image used is tagged right and has alt text.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Comments

Why is a paragraph-sized lead section split up into two paragraphs?
The pronunciation of his name is uncited.
"In 1656, Ančić asked di Gaieta, to return to his homeland" should be changed to "In 1656, Ančić asked di Gaieta to return to his homeland"
"At a chapter held in Kraljeva Sutjeska friary held on 28 August 1669" remove the second "held"
"In the scope of the task" Not sure what this means.

@Governor Sheng: That's all I've got. :) E_F⁵ 14:31, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]