Previous peer review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I've expanded it significantly, and would like to see if it might pass a FA review.

Thanks, Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:12, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I just glanced over the article but I found it very odd that there is a section entitled "Religion" that contains virtually no information on the subject's actual religion but instead talks about hot springs as if that is something the reader is familiar with (which I am not). I cannot imagine a FA without any actual information on religious beliefs being given. Regards SoWhy 14:40, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that I only managed the first three paragraphs of the main article before deciding that quite a bit of work needs to be done before it is ready for FAC. Below is a non-exhaustive list of issues which I feel need addressing in these paragraphs, which will hopefully give you some pointers for the rest of the article.

• The first, straightforward, sentence has eight separate cites. Overkill?

  The citations are due to the fact that this could "technically" be challenged. A lot of historians who don't look deeply into the Iazyges (read, almost all of them) lump them in with the other nomads by virtue of their ethnic kinhood, whereas the ones who have actually looked into it have called them semi-sedentary. This sentence is actually one of the single most contentious is the articles, as its tied into various ethnic disputes in the Balkans. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 17:59, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• The first sentence tries to do too much and IMO the prose is not "engaging and of a professional standard". Is the first clause trying to say something like 'Originally nomads, after migrating to the Tisza plain the Iazyges became semi-sedentary and some towns were established'?
•  Done
• "between which they migrated to feed their cattle" begs several questions and communicates poorly. I am, honestly, left guessing as to what this means. (Eg, did they each keep cattle in a number of different towns, and move between them, feeding the stationary cattle as they passed?)
•  Done
• Second sentence: while occasionally appropriate, "very" is a word to watch. In addition it is IMO stretching the source, which reads "fairly distinct".

  I've always thought "very" and "fairly" meant about the same, but I've changed it to "quite" because that seems appropriately weaker. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 17:59, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• "When an Iazyx became too old to fight in battle, they were killed by their sons" This is a strong claim to make as a statement of fact in Wikipedia's voice. Examining the two sources given, both simply report without comment the claim of the first century writer Valerius Flaccus. He would not under any circumstances be considered a reliable source, and studies of his work have commented on his "rhetorical exaggeration" and "wry humour". Your sourcing the claim to the works of two reputable modern historians might be considered an attempt to obfuscate verification of the claim in the article,

   Done

• "according to Roman geographer Pomponius Mela, threw themselves from a rock" Is a fanciful, unsupported 2,000-year old tale really appropriate for Wikipedia. At best in a separate section towards the end, not in the main text; and in the first paragraph!

  Unsure how I'd actually do anything here. Perhaps move both Valerius Flaccus' and Pomponius Mela's claims to a footnote? Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 17:59, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• "The Iazyges' name was Latinized as Iazyges Metanastae (Ἰάζυγες Μετανάσται) and Jazyges, and sometimes as Iaxamatae" "and" should be 'or' in both cases. Similarly in the following sentence.
•  Done
• "They were rarely called the Iazyigs, Iazygians, Iasians, Yazigs and Iazuges." I suspect that what this means is 'They were also occasionally referred to as the Iazyigs, Iazygians, Iasians, Yazigs or Iazuges.'
•  Done
• "Several corruptions of their names" Either 'these names' or 'their name'.
•  Done
• Who or what is "Peter Edmund Laurent". Ie, introduce his authority to make this judgement.
•  Done
• "the Iazyges Metanastæ, a warlike Sarmatian race, which had migrated under Claudius" They really had a leader called Claudius?
•  Done
• The third sentence of the third paragraph largely repeats the first.
•  Done

There are other points, but hopefully you get the idea. Unless the sourcing, comprehensibility and use of English considerably improve in the rest of the article then I don't think that it is ready for FAC. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:54, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: I appreciate the review, and the honesty. I'll look into improving it as best I can. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 17:59, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I find it difficult, I think that many editors do, to give non-positive reviews. So there is a tendency to move along to articles where one can be positive. But I reckoned that I owed you a frank opinion and that you would accept it as it was intended. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:40, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• (singular Iazyx (singular IPA: [aɪə'zɪɡiːz], plural IPA: [aɪə'zɪs]^{[citation needed]}); Could you please explain me why there isn't a citation here if it is needed here? I'll continue later on. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 10:30, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]