Talk:San Lazzaro degli Armeni

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeSan Lazzaro degli Armeni was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 30, 2017Good article nomineeNot listed
January 23, 2019Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on San Lazzaro degli Armeni. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:33, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on San Lazzaro degli Armeni. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:07, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on San Lazzaro degli Armeni. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:42, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:San Lazzaro degli Armeni/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vami IV (talk · contribs) 14:23, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Opening statement[edit]

Hello! I will be your reviewer for as long as it takes to pass this article to Good Article. I have experience with writing about Architecture on Wikipedia, but not with Armenia, and it will be up to the reviewee to provide me with pertinent context.

For replying to Reviewer comment, please use  Done,  Fixed, plus Added,  Not done,  Doing..., or minus Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. I will be crossing out my comments as they are redressed, and only mine. A detailed, section-by-section review will follow after this and my first comment (Referencing). –♠Vami_IV†♠ 14:23, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing[edit]

Short and brutal: the referencing on the article is a geographical mess. To begin, all properly sfn-cited are in working order, which is good, except for Lord Byron at the Armenian Convent, which has no citations linking to it. There are a number of books and academic articles that are not in this walled garden, thus breaking the sfn format and standing in stark contrast to sfn citations they touch. As of time of writing, these are citations 8, 11, 13, 23, 28 to 30, 39 to 44, 57, 61 (does not have page number), 62, 64, 66, 71, 80, 81 to 86, 90 to 92, 96, 97, 100, 101, 106, 110, 112 to 119, 122, 124, 127, 128, and 131. A number of these also do not use the |url= parameter, instead using an external link in |page(s)=. As of time of writing, these are 8, 13, 23, 28, 29, 39 to 44, 57, 71, 82 to 85, 92, 106, 110, 112, 113, 115, and 117. Reduce these to "Bibliography" into relevant sections and use sfn citations. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 15:29, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What do you suggest I do with the "books and academic articles that are not in this walled garden"? I've only included sources which are directly related to the island. It would take so much time to include all articles in the Bibliography section, which I do not have. ----Երևանցի talk 08:15, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ahhh! I didn't see your reply. I was linked this tool recently. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 20:13, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Secondly, there are several citations with comments on them, which is also against the grain of the article because it already uses efn footnotes. These are either redundant, already being in the article prose (citations 3, 9, 28, 45, 51, 59, 65, 77, 78 (double instance), 83, 88, 90, and 129), irrelevant (citations 46, 113, and 115), or should be in the article prose (citations 50, 71, and 123 to 125). –♠Vami_IV†♠ 21:50, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Progress[edit]

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
  • Any update on how this review is progressing? AIRcorn (talk) 22:24, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.