01:2401:24, 20 March 2024diffhist−13
Macrinus
Discussion on the template has died out, but there was a general consensus that the template shouldn't be placed on these articles.current
23:4323:43, 14 March 2024diffhist−1,571
Burebista
Removing large tracts of uncited, contestable or contentious claims. This article is a GA, changes to the article need to comply with the GACR.Tag: Manual revert
08:0308:03, 16 February 2024diffhist−81
Macrinus
Should be p. 76 rather than p. 176. Goldsworthy is more reserved about the cancer, suggesting it is speculative. I don't have the other source to hand, it's probably more explicit. He also mentions that she starved herself.
01:4101:41, 16 February 2024diffhist−2,051
Russian invasion of Ukraine
Still synth, still OR, still fails V. There's no mention of 'international experts' in either source. The sources do not mention this airstrike or this building. Neither source directly labels Putin a war criminal.Tag: Reverted
13:3613:36, 14 February 2024diffhist−26
Mortuary temple of Hatshepsut
There are dates for Hatshepsut's reign within the footnote next to that sentence. A single date isn't provided because there is variance in estimates and as each source cited is a (HQ) reliable source, none are treated with greater prominence to abide by DUE weight.Tag: Manual revert
04:3804:38, 12 January 2024diffhist+33
Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations
→Proposal: mandate compliance with WP:TOOBIG in GA criterion 3b: I noticed a comment where Jacobolus struck elements of their commentary as being 'too sharp'. I'll strike any 'too sharp' hyperbole in my own. There was at least one non-combative post made by each editor in the thread, so not 'nothing but' or 'pure'. I cannot strike vitriol, as that is well evidenced. I also cannot strike 'derailing' because there is a literal hatting for 'not constructive' commentary in the discussion.