Talk:Checheyigen/GA1
GA Review
{{atopg
| status =
| result = Passed. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
}}
{{Good article tools}}
Nominator: {{User|AirshipJungleman29}} 23:46, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 15:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
I'll try to get to this one soon! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 15:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Preliminary stuff: Image is good and CC-licensed (and has alt-text, yay!) It's also stable, and none of the quickfail criteria apply. Moving on...
Text:
- {{green|excellent}} is a bit puffy and I feel unhelpful - since it could be interpreted as particularly enjoyable marriages. I know you're getting at strategic marriages, so that might be better to use here.
- Changed to "advantageous".
- Nice. - G
- Wouldn't the big parenthetical statement work better as an EFN here? Not necessary obvs
- Done.
- It might be good to explicitly state that the year of her death is unknown in the later life section.
- Annoyingly, no source actually says that. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Argh, always a shame. Well, nothing you can do there - G
Overall very good, broad coverage of a fairly obscure figure. Source review to come.
Checked Broadbridge 2016, May 2018, Broadbridge 2018, and Dunnell 2023. No discrepancies I can find, and it seems to cover these sources quite well. I couldn't find any other good sources on her, so I assume you did your research! Looks good to me. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:08, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
{{abot}}