# Talk:Pyrrhus's invasion of the Peloponnese

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pyrrhus' invasion of the Peloponnese/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: West Virginian (talk · contribs) 19:35, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Kyriakos, I will complete a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime. Thanks! -- West Virginian  (talk) 19:35, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks West Virginian. I look forward to your suggestions. Kyriakos (talk) 21:17, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Kyriakos, I have completed a thorough and comprehensive review and re-review of this article and I find that it meets Good Article criteria. Prior to its passage, however, I have shared a few items below that must be addressed. Thank you for all your extraordinary work in researching and drafting this article! -- West Virginian  (talk) 20:17, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Lede

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article stands alone as a concise overview and summary of the article. The lede defines the invasion, establishes context for the invasion, explains why the invasion is notable, and summarizes the most important points of the invasion.
The info box template is beautifully formatted and its content is available within the article's prose and is sourced and verifiable.
The artist's depiction of the Siege of Sparta has been released into the public domain and is therefore free for use here.
In the first paragraph, it should be stated "...by Pyrrhus, King of Epirus..."
Would it read better if the sentence in the first paragraph read as such: "The war ended with a joint victory by Macedonia and Sparta."
Otherwise, the lede is well-written, its contents are cited below within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this section.
Done. I believe that I have addressed these issues. Kyriakos (talk) 05:39, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Prelude

The map depicting the campaigns of Pyrrhus is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0 and is therefore acceptable for use here.
Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking, I suggest cleaning up some the links so that not all of them are redirects. For example: the Battle of Asculum is linked "Battle of Asculum" but then is redirected to Battle of Asculum (279 BC), Lilybaeum is linked to "Lilybaeum" but then is redirected to Marsala, etc. Please try to correct some of these with Wikipedia:Piped link. This is prevalent throughout the article, so I suggest fixing a few of the links with a pipe link.
Otherwise, this section is well-written, its contents are cited within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this section.
War against Macedon

The image of the Macedonian coin depicting King Antigonus II is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0 and is therefore available for use here. A period should probably be added to the caption as it is a complete sentence.
For better flow, I suggest placing inline citations at the end of sentences in numeral order unless a citation absolutely has to be placed in the center of a sentence. An example of this occurrence is in the sentence where Pyrrhus was accused as an agent of the monarchs of Ptolemaic Egypt.
In the final paragraph, I would write it as "central Greece" in the last paragraph, but it is fine if it is still linked to the Central Greece region article.
Otherwise, this section is well-written, its contents are cited within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this section.
Advance into the Peloponnese

The map depicting the Peloponnese is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0 and is therefore acceptable for use here.
Place names should be listed consistently here, so when Lacedaimon is listed, it should probably specified that this is referring to Sparta for those readers that are unaware that the two names have historically referred to the Sparta city state.
Peninsula probably doesn't need to be wiki-linked here per WP:OVERLINK.
Again Central Greece is a proper name and should probably be rendered as "central Greece" throughout this article.
Otherwise, this section is well-written, its contents are cited within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this section.
Siege of Sparta

The image of the bust of Pyrrhus, king of Epirus is released into the public domain and is therefore acceptable for use here.
In the first paragraph, it should be made clear that the settlement being referred to his Sparta. Again, Lacedaimon is then used interchangeably to refer to Sparta. There may need to be a note placed toward the beginning of the article explaining that both refer to the Sparta city state to avoid confusion and allow for consistency throughout the article.
In the second paragraph, I suggest placing "council of elders" in parenthesis following "gerousia."
In the second paragraph, Pausanias should be introduced when mentioned. Something like Greek geographer Pausanias, or another phrase that introduces his relevance in making such an assertion...
The image of the coin depicting King Areus is released into the public domain and is acceptable for use here. The caption could probably stand to use a period as it is a complete sentence.
Otherwise, this section is well-written, its contents are cited within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this section.
March to Argos

The map of the southern and central Peloponnese is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0 and is therefore acceptable for use here.
This section is well-written, its contents are cited within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this section.
Battle of Argos

The depiction of Pyrrhus and his war elephants has been released into the public domain and is acceptable for use here.
For better flow, I suggest placing inline citations at the end of sentences in numeral order unless a citation absolutely has to be placed in the center of a sentence.
Otherwise, this section is well-written, its contents are cited within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no other comments or suggestions for this section.
Comment. I have retained the citation in the middle of the text so that readers are able to distinguish between those who believed that Pyrrhus died as a result of the tile or from decapitation. Kyriakos (talk) 05:51, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Aftermath

This section is well-written, its contents are cited within the text, the references are verifiable, and I have no comments or suggestions for this section.
Done. I believe that I have addressed all of your concerns. If I have missed any, please let me know. Thanks! Kyriakos (talk) 05:51, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Kyriakos, thank you tremendously for your timely response and I apologize profusely for my tardy one! I've re-reviewed the article and I find that you have sufficiently addressed my suggestions in the article and responded to other comments above. Thank you for this comprehensive narrative illustrating Pyrrhus' invasion of the Peloponnese. It's been a privilege reviewing this article and I hereby pass it to Good Article status. Thanks again! -- West Virginian  (talk) 06:11, 30 April 2015 (UTC)