Talk:Battle of Lade

Battle of Lade was one of the Warfare good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 8, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
July 18, 2009	Good topic candidate	Promoted
October 18, 2010	Good topic candidate	Promoted
April 28, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted
January 22, 2024	Good topic removal candidate	Demoted
Current status: Delisted good article

Greece Mid‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history 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.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Iran Mid‑importance

	Iran portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance

	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.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Phoenicia Low‑importance

	Phoenicia portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Phoenicia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Phoenicia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.PhoeniciaWikipedia:WikiProject PhoeniciaTemplate:WikiProject PhoeniciaPhoenicia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Classical

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

film

Herodotus, 6.11-6.16. Dionysius's speech thtough the desctruction of the Samians, seems like it would make a good film. Are there any films covering this period? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.718281828plus (talk • contribs) 20:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)

It is reasonably well written:
Not Yet
1. Longdashes should not have any spaces between them. Any normal dashes (-) in the text should be replaced with longdashes (—).

Done

1. There are a number of typos and other grammatical errors thoughout the prose. I recommend it recieve a copy-edit, preferably by a third party (but you could do this yourself as well).

Ah, yes. Whoops. I've gone through and removed everything I could find (including my shocking inability to type "contingent" properly).

It is factually accurate and verifiable:
Not Yet
1. "Herodotus gives the order of the Ionian battle line as being, from east to west; Miletus – Priene – Myus – Teos – Chios – Erythraea – Phocaea – Lesbos – Samos." -needs a ref.

Done

1. The big quote in the "Prelude" section ""Men of Ionia, let each one of you now show..." needs a ref.

Done##Per WP:FOOT, the refs should be in the form of "Name, p. #" Some of them are in this format, but not all of them.

Done

1. All of the refs need to be put into {{cite book}} format.

Done

It is broad in its coverage:
Pass No problems there.
It follows the neutral point of view policy:
Pass
It is stable:
Pass No problems there.
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
Pass No problems there.
Overall:
On Hold while a few stylistic issues are addressed. -Ed!^(talk) 03:50, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. The article now meets the GA criteria, according to my interpretation of them. Well done! Ed!^(talk) 13:19, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Triremes

About the bit that said Athens and the Eretrians sent men in 25 ships in 498 B.C:

The referenced secondary mentions only 20 "ships".

Indeed, Athens as a state procured its first triremes from Corinth only at the end of the decade. These 20 would more likely, if fighting craft at all, have been the 50-oared pentekonters that were the Archaic Greek workhorse.

Thoughts?

Casualties

What is the source for the numbers shown on "Casualties and losses"? Alagos (talk) 14:07, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Lade. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051103001745/http://www.livius.org:80/a/turkey/lade/lade.html to http://www.livius.org/a/turkey/lade/lade.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:09, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Battle of Lade

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Speedy delist due to overwhelming consensus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:28, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Massive citation issues (reliability of sources, lack of inline citations, reliance on one source). Fails criterion 2 any day. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:28, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delist. The article is a paraphrase of Herodotus. T8612 (talk) 00:46, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. Concurred with T8612. Ifly6 (talk) 01:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Heavy reliance on single primary source. The initial History section lacks any citation. Can't see it still meets modern GA standard . Monstrelet (talk) 08:58, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Aside from the sourcing questions – both the overreliance on direct citations to Herodotus, and some uncited claims which really need referencing – the lead is surely far too short to meet criterion 1b. By far the main editor, MinisterForBadTimes, hasn't edited wikipedia in nearly a decade, so unless someone else picks this up for rescuing I suspect it'll need delisting. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 16:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Large chunks of unsourced content and a commendable effort to be entirely made up of one primary source. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 21:23, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist - not close to the modern standards for GA. Hog Farm _Talk 18:42, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.