Talk:Battle of the Saw

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 13:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

I had this page on my watchlist for some unclear reason, so I'll pick up the GAN. Hog Farm _Bacon 13:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Images

• Can you add a note into the map caption indicating which numbered mark represents the Saw? It's not clear, as its not at one of the named cities. Presuming that its #7.

Good point. Sloppy of me. Added.

Background

• Like with the Siege of Tunis article, can you add a brief mention of the name Mercenary War when the revolt transitions to open conflict

Done.

Campaign

• "The Carthaginians were probably organised in three divisions: one under Hamilcar, one under his senior subordinate general Hannibal, and the third a strong cavalry force commanded by Naravus" - I'm assuming Naravus is a typo for Naravas.

Gah! Thank goodness one of us is literate. Fixed.

Infobox

• I feel like "light" would be better than "unknown" for Carthaginian casualties in the infobox.

True. Changed.

Not much to talk about here. Very well written article, and since the majority of it is the same as the material from the Siege of Tunis article I just reviewed, I've already caught most of the errors in the prose. Placing on hold. Hog Farm _Bacon 14:41, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Hog Farm, that was very swift of you. All done. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:01, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Passing this one. My goal is to try to get to 250 GA reviews by the end of the year; I'm at 236 right now, so that ought to be doable. Hog Farm _Bacon 17:49, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Hog Farm, I shall try to generate some more GANs, to help you out. That is exceptionally impressive! Gog the Mild (talk) 18:22, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 22:24, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that a Carthaginian army trapped 40,000 rebels and starved them into cannibalism before attacking them and killing every man at the Battle of the Saw? Source: Hoyos, Dexter (2007). Truceless War: Carthage's Fight for Survival, 241 to 237 BC. Leiden ; Boston: Brill. ISBN 978-90-474-2192-4. "40,000 rebels" p. 206; "starved them into cannibalism" p. 211; "attacking them and killing every man" pp. 216-217.

• Reviewed: United States war plans (1945–1950)

5x expanded by Gog the Mild (talk). Self-nominated at 01:04, 28 October 2020 (UTC).

• Five times expanded, well-referenced and neutrally written throughout, Earwig finds only a book title and one short unavoidable phrase. Hook is interesting and cited, QPQ done, ready to go. Good work. The illustration by Poirson was a nice find! Moonraker (talk) 02:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

• Hi, I came by to promote this, but I'm having trouble finding the 40,000 rebels in the article. Could you add that, with a cite? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 21:39, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Apologies Yoninah. I think that comes of being too close to the material. Added and cited. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:01, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

• @Gog the Mild: did you save it? I don't see anything in the edit history. Yoninah (talk) 22:05, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Yoninah [1] Gog the Mild (talk) 22:15, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

• Thank you! Yoninah (talk) 22:21, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Statement Quality Predictions

Hi,

The below statements were identified by an AI as having minor POV issues. The aim is to detect weasel words and inflated/ambiguous language in the statements automatically to aid in article review. Please let us know inline if these below statements indeed have NPOV issues. Feel free to leave general comments on my talk page. Your valuable feedback will help us evaluate the AI and refine it for practical use. See the discussion on FAR for more information. Sumit (talk) 03:56, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

• Hanno and Hamilcar marched after the rebels with an army totalling over 25,000 men and a large number of war elephants, including every Carthaginian citizen of military age. At the ensuing battle the rebels were crushed.
• He was only saved from destruction when an African leader, Naravas, who had served with and admired Hamilcar in Sicily, swapped sides with his 2,000 cavalry. This proved disastrous for the rebels, and in the resulting battle they lost 10,000 killed and 4,000 captured.
• They attempted to hold out, but Polybius says that they too "quickly" surrendered, probably in late 238 BC or very early 237 BC. The surrendered towns and cities were treated leniently, although Carthaginian governors were imposed on them.
• Carthage was fighting a coalition of mutinous soldiers and rebellious African cities in the Mercenary War which had started in 240 BC.
• The Carthaginians then attacked the leaderless, starving rebels with their whole force, led by their elephants, and they were massacred to a man.

Content balance

Although this article—a featured article—is titled "Battle of the Saw", there is very little about the actual battle in it. Instead, there are many sections and paragraphs about the First Punic War, the Mercenary War (itself a featured article three months ago), the campaigning that led to the battle, and discussion of the armies involved. The battle itself is disposed of in three sentences. The "aftermath" section alone has that many paragraphs. I have to submit that this article, as it currently stands, could very well be merged with the article about the war. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 17:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)