# Talk:Udagbedo

This review is transcluded from Talk:Udagbedo/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Vanderwaalforces (talk · contribs) 00:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 18:48, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I'll get a review posted this week. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:48, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Vanderwaalforces, I checked through two of the sources, and the referencing in this article is not great. A lot of the content cited to Egharevba (1968) is either unsupported (presumably it's taking credit for the sources next to it), or is copied with just a few words switched. A lot of the content cited to Walker (2006) is entirely unsupported. There's also one source that's self-published and shouldn't be in the article. Even for a longer article with many opportunities for an error, this would be too many referencing issues. With only a few hundred words, I'd expect the source review to basically turn up nothing. I'm going to close the review so the article can be reworked. I hope to see this make it to GA in the future once the references are fixed up! Thebiguglyalien (talk) 07:21, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
References:

Kings, Magic, and Medicine is not a reliable source, as Lulu.com is a self-publishing website.
It's probably a coincidence, but just to check: both Egharevba (1968) and Egharevba (1947) are cited to page 11. Is this correct for both of them?
As a side note, the same citation doesn't need to be reused at the end of each sentence. When a citation is placed, it's assumed that it covers all of the uncited sentences behind it.
The referencing to the legacy section seems confused, but that looks to be a consequence of trying to create a lead-style summary at the end of the article cited to everything. Neither source I checked mentioned anything about the expansion of his rule or having a daughter.
Egharevba (1968):

Unable to verify the Ga people maintained their cultural and linguistic ties with the Benin people
The story of Agbodo's death reads as legend, to the point that I hesitate to say it should be in wikivoice. Same with the sons of Ozolua testing their prowess.
Unable to verify expanded Benin's rule to the Ga region of present-day Ghana
Compare the article Agbodo declared that his remains would be interred in his residence at Ogbe to the source He often boasted that when he died his corpse would be buried in his house at Ogbe
Compare he instructed his sons to place his body in the second impluvium of his house to He ordered his sons to put his body in the second impluvium of his house
Compare The pond was filled by Oba Akenzua II between 1935 and 1937, and the Benin Divisional Council Public Works Department was built over it in 1949 to The pond was filled up by the present Oba, Akenzua II, between 1935 and 1937 and the Benin Divisional Council Public Works Department was built over it in 1949
Walker (2006):

Unable to verify Udagbedo was born in Benin City, the capital of the Benin Empire.
Unable to verify He was the second son of Oba Oguola, the fifth Oba of Benin, and the brother of Oba Edoni, the sixth Oba of Benin.
Unable to verify Udagbedo became the seventh Oba of Benin
I don't know if I'd mark it against the article, but He inherited a kingdom that had established trade connections with the Saharan states to the north and the Yoruba kingdoms to the west seems vaguely OR-ish, as it just mentions that those were trade connections they had, not that they're ones that were relevant to Udagbedo's reign. The Portugal trade seems more relevant to Udagbedo, but it's not mentioned at all.
Unable to verify He encouraged the cultivation – It only mentions that these are the things that they traded, not that he personally made any effort to increase their cultivation.
He also promoted the export – Same issue.
Compare leopard skins, soap, and later, palm oil to leopard skins, soap and later, palm oil – There aren't that many ways to rephrase a list, but copying the "and later" phrasing changes it from necessary similarity to a copy-and-paste.

As I was asked to take a look:

It makes sense to move the "Sources and Historiography" section up, as the first section, since the discussed works are the basis for the article. That's our usual order.
John D. Fage praised the 1960 edition's scholarly improvements, particularly the revised orthography, structural changes, and newly added material on the Ogiso monarchy and early Obas. – I think that this might be going off-topic; it does not really add to the reader's understanding of the reliability of the book as a source. Maybe delete or move to the book article.
Only red-link the academics if you think that they are relevant to warrant their own articles.
as well as the description of him as a "white man" – that's interesting, but you didn't discuss it elsewhere in the article? Where was he described as a "white man", in what contect?
apocryphal – link, and ideally explain, this term.
Hope that helps. Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:45, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

done, thank you so much for the suggestions. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 10:05, 19 June 2025 (UTC)