Talk:Kōka ikki/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: 3family6 (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Z1720 (talk · contribs) 00:52, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Starting review. Comments will come below. Z1720 (talk) 00:52, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Prose comments:

More information about its formation should be in the lede before the alliance is mentioned. How was this formed?
"After centuries of rivalry with Iga Province to the south, eventually the district worked closely in alliance with Iga." -> "Although rivals with the Iga Province to the south, Koka District and Iga Province formed an alliance in _____ (put the year here) and developed a close relationship." Or something similar.
"Formation" should be split into at least two paragraphs.
As I am reading, I am very confused as to why Iga is mentioned so often. Many times, Koka is compared to Iga, or maybe they are the same thing? I think information on Iga needs to be removed unless it directly pertains to Koka, and comparisons between the two should be removed or perhaps mentioned very minimally (maybe once)
"The historian Stephen Turnbull wrote that Takigawa Castle, associated with the Ōhara family, is a typical arrangement of these forts." The article should explain the arrangement.

I'm confused. I already do this in the subsequent paragraphs.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"According to the Bansenshūkai, an early Edo period document compiled in 1676 by a member of the Fujibayashi family, in 1558, Rokkaku Yoshikata was campaigning against a rebel retainer, Dodo, and besieged him in Sawayama Castle." Too many commas; this needs to be rephrased.
"Conquest" needs to be divided into more paragraphs.
First paragraph of "Government" should be divided into more paragraphs
"However, Maltsev hypothesizes that in the chaotic and violent environment of the Sengoku period, state formation was cost-prohibitive and potentially hazardous to Iga." How does this relate to Koka-ikki? This is an example of a sentence that can possibly be removed.

After the above are addressed, I'll have to do another prose review because I think there will be a lot of changes and trimming happening. I'll conduct a source review when the article is closer to what the final text will be.

Image review:

Any images of the castles that the group occupied? Any images of members of the clans and what they might have looked like?

I'll put this on hold. Please ping when ready for another readthrough. Z1720 (talk) 01:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Z1720, I'll get to work on these.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 23:19, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@3family6: Are you ready for me to continue this review? If I don't get a response in a couple days, I'll close this as unsuccessful. Z1720 (talk) 20:21, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720 Sorry, I've had trouble with my PC and haven't been able to get started yet. I'll ping you once I can resume. --3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:27, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720 I borrowed my wife's PC and managed to go over the prose. I'm ready for you to continue the review. I apologize for the delay.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720, @3family6, any further progress? Ideally, this review should be wrapped up pretty soon. —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ganesha811 I'm waiting on Z1720's reply --3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've been the one delaying this, real life has been busy. I will try to get back to this soon. Z1720 (talk) 17:35, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@3family6: I am sorry for the delay with this. I have been busy in real life. I took a new look because of how long it has been. Here are some comments:

"The document provided for bugyō (military commissioners) to govern the alliance - 12 from Kōka and 10 from Iga - who would regularly meet along the Iga—Kōka border in which" I think this was a thought that was not completed.

Source review: Version reviewed

No concerns with formatting.
Sources reviewed: Refs 13, 44, 45, 46, 50a & b. No concerns.
No plagiarism detected with earwig

Just one minor concern before this can pass. Z1720 (talk) 02:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720 Thank you so much! No worries on the delay, I've only a few days ago resolved the computer issues I had. Yes, that was an incomplete thought. Fixed.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]