Talk:Battle of Toro

Military history: European / Spanish / Medieval

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:
/
	European military history task force
	Spanish military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Spain Mid‑importance

	Spain portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Portugal Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal 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.PortugalWikipedia:WikiProject PortugalTemplate:WikiProject PortugalPortugal articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Portugal To-do:

Find correct name The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere. The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo.

Improve key articles to Good article

Improve

Review

Category:History of Portugal: lots to remove there
Template:Regions of Portugal: statistical (NUTS3) subregions and intercommunal entities are confused; they are not the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be listed explicitly and not assume they are only intermunicipal entities (which accessorily are not statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this box).

Requests

See Requested articles

Assess

Help assessing articles.

Need images

Translate from Portuguese Wikipedia

Wikify

Vote:

Watch this list — Edit this list

Middle Ages Mid‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Battle of Toro was nominated as a History good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (June 27, 2012). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on March 1, 2014, March 1, 2016, and March 1, 2018.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Nomination for GA status

It's a rare occasion indeed when I happen to run across two articles that are worthy of GA status within a 24 hour period, but I do feel that this article could definitely get sort of a look, maybe a potential FA status later on. Is is possible that the people who wrote this article would be interested in making the edits needed if I were to nominate this article? Thanks for reading!LeftAire (talk) 05:31, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated for GA status

I've nominated articles I haven't written for GA and it passed through fine, but this one is different. It's obvious that there's a lot of work put into this, it's well sourced, but the navigation of the article could use a fix. I think the article needs restructuring, but I think there is someone better suited to reviews this article than me. I would like to see this get GA, and I still do think it can. LeftAire (talk) 16:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Lemonade51 (talk · contribs) 19:21, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I am going to fail this as I feel it does not meet the basic requirements of a good article.

There should be no references in the lead, per WP:LEAD as it acts as a summary for the entire article, so the notion is it will be developed below and cited, where appropriate. In this case, there are excessive references, just to prove one statement.
The lead at present does not summarise the article. Why is António M. Serrano's quote doing in the lead?
Several bits are in bold which should not be, for more information see MOS:BOLD.
One lined sentences are incorrectly placed as sole paragraphs.
Headings should not be referenced
Unsourced statements "Apparently the Portuguese captains had good reasons..."
Image caption of Prince John far too long

I would advise you to have a look at a model article, similar to this one for ideas and the Wikipedia:Manual of Style because it needs to be wikified. Ideally you should then take this to WP:PR to iron out issues. Lemonade51 (talk) 19:40, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Reviewer: Iberic (talk · contribs) 19:21, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article battle of Toro is a high quality work, very well sourced and written in a balanced way:

It’s completely impartial since uses a large amount of contemporaneous sources from both sides and also modern ones.
It’s very complete, covering the subject from all perspectives.
It’s objective.
It’s easy to read (in spite of its size) since the themes are presented in a very interesting way, never losing the “big picture”.
It’s verifiable as its many citations are not only elucidative but also online verifiable.
However, there could be some gap between the content level (what is said) and the form level (how it is said). This last one can be improved, but no need of drama.

--Iberic (talk) 13:06, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Battle of Toro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121204110514/http://genealogiaroriguezmonge.com:80/12b.html to http://genealogiaroriguezmonge.com/12b.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:58, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Battle of Toro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:49, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Toro. 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/20130629233925/http://www.tutorformacion.es/plataforma/contenidos/ESO/HIS/UD%2013.%20Los%20grandes%20Reinos%20peninsulares.pdf to http://www.tutorformacion.es/plataforma/contenidos/ESO/HIS/UD%2013.%20Los%20grandes%20Reinos%20peninsulares.pdf

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) 21:44, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Battle of Toro. 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) 06:26, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

I've added a cleanup tag. The article is using some incredibly complex and non-standard wikisource, with {{big}} and "sup" and "nowiki" etc.. all unnecessary and prone to breakage and rot over time. -- GreenC 17:20, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]