# Talk:Ethiopia in the Middle Ages

The English Wikipedia prefers no national variety of English over any other. Varieties (for example American English or British English) differ in vocabulary (elevator vs. lift), spelling (defense vs. defence), and occasionally grammar. Some of our articles ( such as English plurals and Comparison of American and British English ) provide information about such differences.
An article's date formatting (November 23, 2025 vs. 23 November 2025) is also related to national varieties of English – see MOS:DATEFORMAT and especially MOS:DATETIES and MOS:DATEVAR - but is not a conclusive 'tiebreaker'.
Within this article the conventions of one particular variety of English should be followed consistently. 
[Exceptions include:

Quotations, titles of works (books, films, etc.) should be as given in the source;
Proper names use the subject's own spelling, e.g., joint project of the United States Department of Defense and the Australian Defence Force; International Labour Organization.]
Retain the existing variety

When an English variety's consistent usage has been established in an article, maintain it in the absence of consensus to the contrary. With few exceptions (e.g., when a topic has strong national ties or the change reduces ambiguity), there is no valid reason for changing from one acceptable option to another.
When no English variety has been established and discussion does not resolve the issue, use the variety found in the first post-stub revision that introduced an identifiable variety. The established variety in a given article can be documented by placing the appropriate Varieties of English template on its talk page.
An article should not be edited or renamed simply to switch from one variety of English to another. The {{uw-engvar}} template may be placed on an editor's talk page to explain this.
Opportunities for commonality

For an international encyclopedia, using vocabulary common to all varieties of English is preferable.

Use universally accepted terms rather than those less widely distributed, especially in titles. For example, glasses is preferred to the national varieties spectacles (British English) and eyeglasses (American English); ten million is preferable to one crore (Indian English).
If one variant spelling appears in a title, make a redirect page to accommodate the others, as with artefact and artifact, so that all variants can be used in searches and linking.
Terms that differ between varieties of English, or that have divergent meanings, may be glossed to prevent confusion, for example, the trunk (American English) or boot (British English) of a car ....
Use a commonly understood word or phrase in preference to one that has a different meaning because of national differences (rather than alternate, use alternative or alternating, as appropriate).
When more than one variant spelling exists within a national variety of English, the most commonly used current variant should usually be preferred, except where the less common spelling has a specific usage in a specialized context, e.g., connexion in Methodist connexionalism.
Strong national ties to a topic

An article on a topic that has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation should use the (formal, not colloquial) English of that nation since the ENGVAR rules are concerned with English varieties that exist in a codified, formal written register with their own style guides. For example:

For topics with strong ties to Commonwealth of Nations countries and other former British territories, use Commonwealth English orthography, largely indistinguishable from British English in encyclopedic writing (excepting Canada, which uses a different orthography). --05h24, 26 August 2021 (UTC) BushelCandle

I believe that this article's promotion to "B" class on the quality scale for Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethiopia is justified - not least because, at the time of promotion, there were no criteria defined to assess "C" class at WikiProject_Ethiopia/Assessments ! --06:14, 29 August 2021 (UTC) BushelCandle

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ethiopia in the Middle Ages/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Shushugah (talk · contribs) 20:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
I will begin my review below. I am looking forward to working with you on bringing this article to GA status. 


### Progress bar
This article is almost GA status. The quality and formatting of the references are excellent. The images are all highly relevant (and well situated). I even learned about the Free Art License used for one of the images. 

I would either make Aksum and Axum consistent or mention in the beginning that the two terms are used interchangeably. It took me some time and clicking to realize they're not separate concepts.
The main article for Judaism should be History of the Jews in Ethiopia or Kingdom of Semien not Beta Israel which deals with more modern topic.
Slaves came from/born in Ethiopia is less demeaning than produced by. A See also Wikilink to Slavery in Ethiopia would also make sense.
A Wikilink to first mention of Eritrea should be mentioned, along with an explanatory hatnote that it recently split from Ethiopia. When discussing the medieval context there's no need to refer to it as Ethiopia/Eritrea in 11th century. It can simply be Ethiopia or whatever other names it had at that point in time.
A See also section would be nice, with a link to History of Ethiopia the parent topic of this article.
All in all, really nicely done! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 20:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I've made the edits you suggested; let me know if it all looks in order now. Thanks for your help! Thiqq (talk) 03:26, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
@Thiqq it was a pleasure working together and congratulations on a Good Article!