# Talk:Stichometry

This material is not copyvio; the site found containing the same content is a poorly-labelled mirror of the 1911 EB. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 20:42, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I'm a UK academic specializing in the history of ancient Greek philosophy and science. I've recently
written, translated, or revised the Wikipedia pages of several scholars who made contributions to the study of stichometry: 
Charles Graux (classicist), Martin Schanz, and Theodor Birt. May I take on reorganizing and rewriting this page?
Please let me know if anyone has any objections or suggestions. Thanks, JohnD'Alembert (talk) 12:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
OK, I'm going to strike while the iron is hot. There is a template on the present version of the page saying it needs a clean up to 
conform to Wikipedia's style. I'm going to replace it with my revised version. Any comments or criticism or improvements are welcome! JohnD'Alembert (talk) 13:03, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
@Sever Juan: Thanks very much for nominating this article!
Thanks too to whoever added the section on kinds/definitions! I have taken one paragraph and moved it
back to the opening section. But otherwise that's a good improvement. Super! JohnD'Alembert (talk) 20:36, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Stichometry/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: LegesRomanorum (talk · contribs) 18:10, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

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

@LegesRomanorum: thanks very much for reviewing and improving this article. Feels like a graduation ceremony! There's a surprising flow of viewers (with a spike of > 1000 in Sept.).  JohnD'Alembert (talk) 23:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

No problem, JohnD'Alembert! Also, do let me know if there's anything a humble BA student in Classics (principally literature, linguistics and textual criticism) can help with. :) LegesRomanorum (talk) 14:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)