Talk:Chalcedonian schism

Chalcedonian schism is currently a Philosophy and religion good article nominee. Nominated by 🎸平沢唯は俺の嫁🐱 (talk) at 23:30, 28 October 2025 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and then edit the page. Short description: Break of communion between the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox churches

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Christianity High‑importance Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Classical Greece and Rome This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

GA review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Chalcedonian schism/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: ILoveHirasawaYui (talk · contribs) 23:30, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Warriorglance (talk · contribs) 13:02, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I will be taking up this article for GA review. You can expect my comments over the next few days. Cheers! Warriorglance(talk to me) 13:02, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: