# Talk:John Palaiologos (brother of Michael VIII)

Why is this in the title? It would seem to me not to conform with MOS. What is wrong with just having his name as the article title? Gatoclass (talk) 07:57, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

There were several Palaiologoi named John, and despot (despotes) was the highest title he had. I don't particularly like it either, if you have any better disambiguation, please suggest it. Perhaps John Palaiologos (brother of Michael VIII)? Constantine  ✍  08:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
How many Palaiolgoi's are there currently on Wikipedia? If none, you don't need to disambiguate at all right now. But if you want to, I think you should at least put "Despot" in brackets to conform with the usual practice. And in lower case I think, unless "Despot" was a formal title. Gatoclass (talk) 10:21, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Aside from him, there are three emperors with that name. I was already thinking about moving the title into brackets, so that's preferable. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  11:18, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:John Palaiologos (Despot)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Parsecboy (talk) 12:38, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

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: 
Only a couple of minor concerns: the Byzantine terms without  their own articles should be explained in the text (even just the word in parentheses). Also, the lead seems a little short to me, but I don't have any specific suggestions as far as expanding it. Nice work, Constantine. Parsecboy (talk) 12:49, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I think I've linked every Byzantine term I used in the article, or at least I can't find any unlinked ones. For the lead, I'll try to expand it. Thanks for the review! Cheers, Constantine   ✍  14:08, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I think it's fine actually. The one I saw that prompted that comment was sebastokratores in the last section, but I forgot it was linked earlier in the page. Parsecboy (talk) 14:54, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
OK then :) Constantine   ✍  15:02, 17 July 2010 (UTC)