Talk:Byzantine Empire under the Heraclian dynasty

message: I protest the move. The reason being is that the name does not conform with the other similar articles:
Byzantium under the Komnenoi</br>
Byzantium under the Angeloi</br>
Byzantium under the Palaiologoi
When a move is proposed a concensus is needed which has not been obtained here. Tourskin 00:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Em, Tourskin, the names "Komnenoi", "Angeloi" and "Palaiologoi" are the plural form of these families' surnames in Greek. "Heraclian" alone means nothing, it is an adjective. It can only have sense in the full term "Heraclian dynasty", i.e. the dynasty founded by Heraclius, which is the only term appropriate to the era the article is describing (no surnames being used at that time). It would be like saying "Britain during the Victorian" or "Rome under the Julio-Claudian". I thought it was merely an oversight on your part, and, it being quite apparent (at least to me) that the term was faulty, I changed it. I did not think there was a need to discuss it. My mistake, noted for the future... Best regards and, BTW, cheers on your good work in Byzantium-related articles! Cplakidas 11:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hold the move there 

message: I'm not formally reviewing this for GA, though if its still here after finals I'll come back. But two quick things, both involve the headers.
*Images generally should not be right after a second-level section header when the picture is left aligned, such as with "The Empire in Chaos" section.
*Section titles should only be capitalized after the first word if a subsequent word is a proper noun.
**Incorrect:==Battles with Religous zealots==
**Correct:==Battles with religous zealots==
**Correct:==Battles against the Greeks==
There are a few instances of both issues that need to be addressed. Aboutmovies (talk) 10:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Lol I have finals comming up too Tourskin (talk) 18:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some GA notes 

message: Per the GA quick fail criteria, I have failed this article as there is a clean-up tag at the top of the article. I do not know the exact reason why someone placed that tag, but I agree it does need some wikification.
*The introductory paragraph does not conform to WP:LEAD. The title is not bolded, and there are not any wikilinks to relevant topics. In fact see, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links), as there are less than 10 wikilinks in the article total, only the Background section appears to be properly linked. Be careful not to over do it, but try to think of yourself as the average reader and what additional info might be available via a wikilink to learn more about something in a sentence. The "see also" headers at the beginning of some of the sections are good, but wikilinks are still needed in the summary paragraph(s).
:This was already done earlier by someone else. Monsieurdl mon talk-mon contribs 16:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The offending sentence was removed completely- it was unsourced anyways. Monsieurdl mon talk-mon contribs 16:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I corrected these mistakes. Monsieurdl mon talk-mon contribs 16:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

text: The title of basileus was meant to be italicized- I fixed it. Monsieurdl mon talk-mon contribs 16:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I only found one remaining mistake, and corrected it. Monsieurdl mon talk-mon contribs 16:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As I mentioned above, I will be contributing large sourced sections from both Ostrogorsky's History of the Byzantine State and Treadgold's History of the Byzantine State and Society, in addition to trying to make all the corrections necessary. After all, if Byzantine Empire is FA, then the subarticles mentioned should also hold a similar status if possible! Monsieurdl mon talk-mon contribs 16:03, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA quick fail