Talk:The Battle of Alexander at Issus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	The Battle of Alexander at Issus has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
June 7, 2007 Good article nominee Listed

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Greece      (Rated GA-Class) Greece Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece. If you would like to participate, you can improve The Battle of Alexander at Issus, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. (comments) Mid This article has been rated as a Mid priority article WikiProject Visual arts     (Rated GA-Class) This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. GA Class: This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.

An entry from The Battle of Alexander at Issus appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 14 April 2007.

[edit] Wikipedia sources

Can you cite Wikipedia as a source for a Wikipedia article? Alekjds ^talk 23:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure, but I have seen it done before on Battle of Hurtgen Forest, the German losses are cited from the German wiki article on the battle.--Bryson^{{Talk}{Edits}} 01:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

There. See the references section. There I cite my references, and then also the ones from the Altdorfer article to actually validate my using of the Altdorfer article as a footnote ref. I hope this clears the matter up. --- ÅñôñÿMôús ^{Dîššíd3nt} 02:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

See, I could understand using Wikipedia as a source for casualty numbers, since the goal there would be to establish a sense of encyclopedia-wide consensus. Using it as a source, that is, like in this article, a major source of material, seems a bit redundant. Does anyone know of a policy to this effect? Alekjds ^talk 21:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

You cant ref wiki in any way. Thats why those refs are now gone. Thanks, --- ÅñôñÿMôús ^{Dîššíd3nt} 01:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

I'm going to be honest: This could use a copyedit. While never awful, some parts are over-wordy or awkwardly-phrased.

However, though the writing is not great, it's still reasonably good, and certainly it's a readable, informative article. In every other respect, this meets GA - it's factually accurate (to the best of my knowledge - certainly it's sourced), broad in coverage, NPOV, and reasonably stable.

So, with some minor doubts, I'm going to promote this, however, if you could have another go-through and fix it so it reads a bit better, that would be for the best. Adam Cuerden ^talk 12:43, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I have have another look over soon. Johnbod 19:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)