Jump to content

Talk:Battle of San Lorenzo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleBattle of San Lorenzo has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 19, 2011Good article nomineeListed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on February 3, 2012, February 3, 2013, February 3, 2015, February 3, 2017, February 3, 2018, February 3, 2020, and February 3, 2024.


Copyedit notes

[edit]

Hi

During the copyedit some points came to light:

Prelude:

  • "One column was led by San Martín, and the other by Justo Germán Bermúdez" - was this one column of royalist and one of "Argentinian"? (I suppose that should be "del Platoan" but that sounded wrong)
  • "This allowed Montevideo to endure" & "Montevideo organized a navy to destroy" & "Buenos Aires dismantled them" - If Montevideo/Buenos Aires can mean "a person", "city" or "region" then it should state which is meant here.

Battle:

  • "Escalada had made other actions against the royalists before this battle." - Is this sentence necessary? It seems to have no reason for being mentioned, such as "and so knew what to expect" or "and had made plans accordingly" etc.

Songs:

  • "weld-yellow" - needs explaining more?

Chaosdruid (talk) 04:14, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The two columns are both from the United Provinces, as the pincer movement involves a two-colums attack rather than a single strong attacking line. But I acknowledge my mistake: I forgot to mention Zabala, leader of the royalists, in the lead. By the way, the term "Argentine" should be used with caution, the United Provinces are a predecesor state of Argentina, but not Argentina yet.
I don't understand the second point. Montevideo and Buenos Aires are, for the grammar purposes, nouns. "endure", "organize", "dismantle", are the verbs that these nouns perform. Is any of those verbs exclusive for the use of people and not cities, or the other way?
"Weld-Yellow" is one of the colours of the Flag of Spain. I think it seems evident from the context, but I linked the article for more clarification. MBelgrano (talk) 01:28, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again - the second point is me trying to work out who or what it is that the noun is referring to. Did someone called Montevideo, or did the city called Montevideo, or did the region called Montevideo do those things. Many readers will have heard of the city and would probably assume it was "This allowed the city of Montevideo to endure", "The city of Montevideo organised a navy" and "The city of Buenos Aires dismantled them". However it could have been a person or region named "Montevideo" who had done these things. It should be made clear which one it was that did these, "This allowed the city of Montevideo to endure" and "The citizens of Montevideo" - as for the last one "Buenos Aires dismantled them" was it the council and the militia?, did all the citizens participate?, etc.
I hope that makes my point a little more clear.
I have taken the liberty of linking the term weld-yellow. The concern was that it seems the usage of "weld" itself implies yellow. I say this because the flag page says it was red-weld which means red-yellow in effect. Chaosdruid (talk) 02:21, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a map of the zone, to help understanding the geographical side of the battle, and remind which are the cities involved here. MBelgrano (talk) 20:25, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of San Lorenzo/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hchc2009 (talk) 18:53, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One of my favourite periods, so it's nice to be able to review the article! I've taken a first cut through below. I'll have a proper look at the copy-editing later and finish the review then. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:43, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, have gone through in some detail below. With a bit of copy-editing done, it should be good at GA. See what you think. Hchc2009 (talk) 20:08, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct;

  • There is still a little bit of copy-editing required - I'll work through that later today.

Lead:

  • " the baptism of fire of this military unit" - "for this military unit"?
  • "The city raided population centres next to the nearby rivers for supplies" - read oddly. How about: "raided population centres along the nearby rivers for supplies"?
  • " José de San Martín, who had arrived to Buenos Aires and created the regiment a short time beforehand, followed their ships to San Lorenzo." - how about: "José de San Martín, who shortly before had arrived in Buenos Aires and formed the regiment, followed the royalist ships to San Lorenzo." ?
  • "Besides the San Carlos convent the area was a large empty plain. The regiment hid inside the convent during the night..." How about "The area around San Lorenzo formed a large empty plain; the regiment hid inside a local convent over night..."?

Prelude:

  • "The military perspectives of Buenos Aires in 1812 were improving from previously difficult times." - Reads oddly. How about "Although Buenos Aires had suffered a difficult period in its war for independence, its prospects were improving by 1812."?
  • "...Belgrano gave a new advantage to the revolution with the battle of Tucumán before heading to Salta." Confused me a little. Perhaps: "...Belgrano's victories at Tucuman and Salta had given new fresh hope to the revolution." or something like that?
  • "The city, however, kept its naval supremacy over Buenos Aires and their ships raided the coasts of the Paraná and Uruguay rivers to endure the siege." "maintained its naval supremacy". You might want to go for "to gather supplies, despite the siege".
  • "Montevideo organized a navy to destroy the gun batteries at Rosario and Diamante but were prevented from doing so as Buenos Aires dismantled them knowing that they could not defend them" - it wasn't clear to me why the Royalists did this, or where Rosario and Diamante were, or how it linked to the next bit.
  • "They moved into the Paraná through its tributary" - you'll probably need to clarify what the royalist navy is trying to do here. Was it conducting another raid for supplies, or was this linked to its attempts to destroy the gun batteries?
  • "the then most recent military techniques" - I suspect you could safely lose the "then" here.
  • "Antonio Zabala" - I think you've forgotten to mention the Royalist commander in the Prelude (although he is in the lead)

Battlefield:

  • "The west gully was high-sided, and a natural fortification, and ships could only land troops and materials through man-made paths. The battlefield was near one of these paths, shaped like a ladder, after which the terrain was a big plain with scattered bushes" There's something wrong here - are you sure that "gully" is the right word? I'm wondering if you meant something like "The west bank of the river was tall and steep, forming a natural obstacle, and ships could only land troops and materials on that side of the river using man-made paths cut into the side."? NB: there might be a gully as well, leading into the river perhaps?
  • "The location was not an easy place to defend as the plains made surprise attacks difficult" This didn't make sense to me. Wouldn't the absence of surprise attacks make it easier to defend?
  • "San Martín studied the battlefield and readied the plan for the operation during the night, when the grenadiers were hidden inside the convent." - do the sources say what the Royalists were doing at this point?

Battle:

  • "San Martín moved the regiment from Retiro to Rosario" Initially I wasn't sure if was this before they reached the convent, or before. It might be worth moving this first paragraph up into the end of the Prelude section. You'd then have him stopping at the convent; the Battlefield bit would then describe the field, and this Battle section would begin nicely on "The grenadiers left the convent at dawn..." That would avoid the repetition and potential confusion.
  • "harangue" - are you sure you mean "harangue"? ("to speak to someone or a group of people, often for a long time, in a forceful and sometimes angry way, especially to persuade them") I was wondering if you meant "speech", or perhaps "motivational speech"?
  • "The cavalry would not shoot" - its grammatically correct, but "The cavalry would not use their guns..." might sound better.

Cabral's intervention:

  • "Regardless of the victory the royalist forces could not be finished off..." Sounded odd. How about "Despite the victory, the remaining royalist forces could not be pursued..."?
  • "A royalist, probably Zabala himself..." I wasn't sure how this bit linked into the beginning of the paragraph - was it happening as the pursuit occurred?
  • "Juan Bautista Cabral is known as "Sergeant Cabral", but he was a private at the time of the battle. San Martín's report mentions him as "the grenadier Juan B. Cabral", and historians like Bartolomé Mitre, Herminio Gaitán, Gerardo Bra or Norberto Galasso support the idea. Mitre considers that Cabral was promoted posthumously, but there are no documents confirming that." - it felt like this should have been in a note section at the bottom. Alternatively, it needs an opening sentence explaining the significance of the point.

Aftermath:

  • " its military value was relative." - this read oddly to me. How about "...its value was more symbolic than military."?
  • "is because" - "was because"?
  • "the size of the forces" - a missing "as" - "as the size of the forces"
  • " to share a great breakfast" - "great" as in "large", "grand" or as in "excellent"?
  • "San Martín was aware that these new enlightened ideas influenced many of the Spanish military" - which new enlightened ideas? I'm not sure you've mentioned these before in the article.
  • " during the time the emancipator ruled" - I'd avoid using the term "emancipator" in this way as an alternative to a pronoun, as it felt a bit POV.
  • " who would inform Britain about the battle" - "who informed Britain about the battle"?

Legacy:

  • "Field of glory" - I'd expect either "Field of Glory" or "field of glory"?
  • "sixteen soldiers who died" - "sixteen patriot soldiers who died"?
  • "Historic pine" - ditto, I'd usually expect either "historic pine" or "Historic Pine"
  • "a "Historic tree"" - - ditto, and "an" rather than "a"

Songs:

  • "The battle of San Lorenzo is the theme for the San Lorenzo march" - "theme of the"
  • "has been considered to be one of the five best military marches ever written" - considered by who? NB: I'm just suggesting that you name who considers it this - I'm sure it's a great military march! :)
  • "A pair of lines of the march about the royalists say "To the wind deployed, their red banner..." although the Spanish flags are both red and weld-yellow, not completely red" I couldn't see the significant of this bit to be honest.

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

  • Looks good at this point.

2. Factually accurate and verifiable:

(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout;

  • I'd expect the Camogli and Privitellio book to be cited as being by joint authors (the article says "Camogli, p.x"; I suspect this should be Camogli and Privitellio, p.x").

(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;

  • There are only three books referenced in the article, but they appear solid. Galasso's volume is available on-line and is a professional academic work; Mitre is a classic Argentinian historian to cite for this period.

(c) it contains no original research.

  • Pass.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;

  • Pass.

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

  • Pass.

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

  • The article has a slight leaning towards José de San Martín, in terms of weight of description and viewpoint, but this is a result of the historiography and copy-editing. The article is broadly neutral and fair.

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

  • The article is stable.

Illustrated, if possible, by images:

(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;

  • Checked and passed.

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

  • Pass

Ready, and thanks fr the review. Some comments and clarifications.

  • I shouldn't mention "Tucuman and Salta", because the battle of Salta took place two weeks after this one. The new hope in Buenos Aires by this point was only because of Tucuman.
  • I included a mention that Diamante and Rosario are next to the Parana River. Clarifing this, I hope the rest is implicit: they made batteries to protect the river, and Montevideo would destroy them to secure their naval operations. I don't think it's needed to pont them in the minimap, as no military conflict actually took place in there.
  • As those batteries were dismantled because they could not be defended (and it may be useful to keep the weapons and ammo for some other use), there was no military attempt to destroy them, Montevideans did nothing. I think that this should be clear, and thus the journey to Obligado was for more raids, but I can add a moe important clarification if needed.
  • Unfortunately, I had already search it when I wrote the article, but I found no personal info about Antonio Zabala, such as why or how did he move from Spain to Montevideo, or how did he come to be in charge of this operation. All the information I found about him is about this battle. It seems that, from a historical point of view, Zabala is inconsequential, his only action of notice was this battle. Which, as described, is actually a minor operation, taken to higher recognition because San Martín fought in it, so I shouldn't expect Spanish historiography to give more answers either.
  • I accept that "gully" may not be the best word. The idea is that the plain is up there, it ends suddenly, there's a vertical distance to the ground, and the river is down there. I had the idea in my mind, but I didn't knowthe name for it in either Spanish or English, and Mitre certainly does not help, he was very given to unnecesary wordiness and said in three or four very long sentences what could be said in just one.
  • to "harangue" is (unless I got it wrong when I searched for it) when a general adresses the army right before the battle, in order to encourage them (and yes, military men are always "forceful" and "angry", surely a real harangue won't be as friendly as Aragorn's at the Black Gates in the "Return of the king" movie).
  • As for Cabral's real rank, the importance lies in that this is one of those cases when something is populary thought to be some way, but all scholars agree in that this is incorrect (people thinks that Cabral was a sergeant, but, besides the details, all historians agree that he was a private). I thought that this info should stay at that section, as it already talks about Cabral, and neither "Aftermath" nor "Legacy" seem the right places. MBelgrano (talk) 23:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Battle of San Lorenzo. 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:

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) 20:49, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of San Lorenzo. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 05:37, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_San_Lorenzo&oldid=1202989862"