Talk:Second Punic War/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 15:38, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Looks interesting. I'm on quarantine, trying to find things to keep busy. Looks like I'll be reviewing this one. Hog Farm Bacon 15:38, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- Lead
- " the main Carthaginian base in the peninsula. in 208 BC Scipio defeated Hasdrubal" - Start the sentence with a capital letter
- Done.
- Maybe add the note about how much 10,000 silver talents was in the lead, too?
- If you insist. I tend to view footnotes like citations and avoid them in the lead and infobox.
- Hasdrubal is mispelled at one point.
- Fixed
- Infobox
- Gnaeus Scipio is in the infobox as a key commander, but is only mentioned there and in a footnote. I'm not convinced he's such a key commander. If he's kept in the infobox, at least his death at Ilorca should be mentioned.
- That was Avis11 adding commanders in after I had nominated. Gn Scipio removed.
- Hasdrubal Gisco is mentioned in the infobox as a key commander, but doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere.
- Likewise.
- Armies
- Maybe use the link to shock troops to eliminate the footnote? I didn't realize that we had an article on that; I could've gotten good use out of that link. A bunch of those Missouri CSA infantry units whose articles I wrote over the summer were used as shock troops in the Vicksburg campaign.
- I didn't think that link helpful to a reader. The article is largely about infantry, as originating with the WWI stross truppen. There really needs to be a separate article on pre-repeating gunpowder weapon shock troops, but until someone writes the article a footnote seems the best of poor options.
- Navies
- " but there were no large-scale naval clashes" - But what about Ebro River?
- A grand total of 95 warships! Wouldn't even be worth an article if it were in the First Punic War. In 218, before or just after the 2PW started, the Romans assembled around 200 warships for their planned invasion of Africa. The Carthaginians had about the same. Ebro falls firmly into the "skirmish" category IMO; it is bigged up by the sources because of the involvement of the Scipios and because, with hindsight, Iberia turned out to be an important theatre.
- Italy
- "and the guerrilla tactics of the native tribes" - Were these tribes aligned with the Romans, or did they just not want the Carthaginians moving through?
- They just saw the Carthaginians as the most attractive set of mobile loot to ever walk past their front doors.
- I'm not convinced of the utility of note 6, since that exact statement has already been made in the primary sources section
- Oops. Good spot. I added it in Sources as a last minute edit and forgot that it was also a note. Fixed.
- "and blockade could be a long-drawn-out affair, or if the target was a port, impossible" - Are you sure blockade is the word you want? I've always understood blockade as being a naval event. It almost sounds more like siege is what you want, although there may be some engvar at play.
- I am quite sure. (Wikipedia article: "stopping all land transport to and from an area may also be considered a blockade"; Wiktionary: "The physical blocking or surrounding of a place, especially a port, in order to prevent commerce and traffic in or out". I realise that the latter says "especially", but it is not a necessary requirement. A siege and a blockade are very different things (with a fuzzy boundary) and I think that the distinction is worth making. Plus the sources agree with me
.
- I am quite sure. (Wikipedia article: "stopping all land transport to and from an area may also be considered a blockade"; Wiktionary: "The physical blocking or surrounding of a place, especially a port, in order to prevent commerce and traffic in or out". I realise that the latter says "especially", but it is not a necessary requirement. A siege and a blockade are very different things (with a fuzzy boundary) and I think that the distinction is worth making. Plus the sources agree with me
- "skilled Liby-Phoenician officer Mottones, who inflicted heavy losses on Marcellus' army through hit-and-run attacks." - This implies knowledge of who Marcellus was, but this is the only mention of Marcellus outside of the infobox.
- Tweaked.
- "Fabius was able to overran the Carthaginian ally Arpi in 213 BC" - Watch your tense
- Watched.
- Iberia
- You're missing a space between words in the caption in the bas-relief image in this section.
- Added.
- "Claudius Nero brought over reinforcements in 210 BC and stabilised the situation" - You might want to specify that this guy is Roman. I can tell Roman from just a glance at the name, but it's not entirely clear from the context, and others may not be able to tell which side from just the name so clearly.
- Hmm. I did wonder when I wrote it. Done.
- Unclear in Note 7 why Publius Scipio is bereaved
- Because his father is dead? What's unclear about it?
- After a couple more readings, I get what's going on here. I was expecting the note to be referencing something in the main prose body, but now I see that it's a self-contained reference. That's fine, then.
- Because his father is dead? What's unclear about it?
- "seizing a vast booty of gold, silver and siege artillery" - What's siege artillery in this context? All of the ones I can think of bar catapults are anachronisms
- Siege engine. Added.
- Africa
- and allowed to enrol volunteers - Looks weird to me, but a Google search suggests that you Brits do spell enroll with only one "l"
- Every time an American reviews an article with that word in I get that comment . To the point of refusing to believe it is really a word.
- Every time an American reviews an article with that word in I get that comment
- References
- You cite two different editions of what appears to be the exact same work by Edwell. For simplicity's sake, can you reduce this to a single edition?
- Well, that created a lot of work, but done.
- Be consistent with citing the OUP books. Sometimes you link the publisher, sometimes you don't. Sometimes you include the location, sometimes you don't.
- I only found one Wikilink. (Although it wasn't at first mention, so I changed it.) Locations: missed one, thanks; inserted.
- I feel like the page numbers for either Mineo or Naco del Hoyo are wrong. Surely they aren't the same page range of the same book.
- Oh! Me bad. Thank you. Sorted.
- Other
- Its seems a little counterintuitive to include the Second Punic War in Category:Third Punic War
- As I mentioned, I rarely look at categories. They are not in the GA nor FA criteria, so I have never felt the need. Fixed.
That's it from me, I think. Very well-written article covering a large topic. Hog Farm Bacon 00:31, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Hog Farm and many thanks for that very prompt review of, as you say, a large topic. All done. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:41, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yep, looks good for GA. Passing. Hog Farm Bacon 16:05, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hog Farm, thanks for that - I do appreciate the speedy service. I wasn't going to do this one, as it looked like a lot of work, but then got carried away. I am inclined to leave it now, but as I will be - I hope - taking the rest of the topic to FA that seems a shame. Coming to it cold, how close to FACable did it seem to you? No need for a lengthy answer, one or two words will suffice. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:27, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- To my unexpert eyes, I'd say there just needs a bit polishing up to get there, although someone with a better view of the topic is gonna have some more comments. I envy your ability to bring these up to FA. Most of mine seem to get capped at A-Class. Hog Farm Bacon 17:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hog Farm, I have probably been writing stuff for (quite a bit) longer than you, and there is nothing like experience. However, at the top of my user page are all of my article promotions in chronological order. Note that I had a lot of GAs before I tried for my first A class, and another 10 before I tried for my second. And quite a few more before I started nominating FACs. In other words, it took a lot of practice to get to the stage where I know how to crank articles up to FA level. IMO, a minority of this is actual prose writing ability, and a good chunk is picking the right articles to work on. (Hint!)
- Thanks for the input. I shall try it at ACR then. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:25, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, you've got quite a bit of a headstart on me. If you'd be up for some QPQ, I've got an open GAN at Battle of Roan's Tan Yard (too short for anything above GA, frankly the sources don't really exist for that one), but you're quite the busy person, so I get it if you can't/don't want to take a look. . Hog Farm Bacon 19:30, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, you've got quite a bit of a headstart on me. If you'd be up for some QPQ, I've got an open GAN at Battle of Roan's Tan Yard (too short for anything above GA, frankly the sources don't really exist for that one), but you're quite the busy person, so I get it if you can't/don't want to take a look.
- To my unexpert eyes, I'd say there just needs a bit polishing up to get there, although someone with a better view of the topic is gonna have some more comments. I envy your ability to bring these up to FA. Most of mine seem to get capped at A-Class. Hog Farm Bacon 17:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hog Farm, thanks for that - I do appreciate the speedy service. I wasn't going to do this one, as it looked like a lot of work, but then got carried away. I am inclined to leave it now, but as I will be - I hope - taking the rest of the topic to FA that seems a shame. Coming to it cold, how close to FACable did it seem to you? No need for a lengthy answer, one or two words will suffice. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:27, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- Yep, looks good for GA. Passing. Hog Farm Bacon 16:05, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Hog Farm and many thanks for that very prompt review of, as you say, a large topic. All done. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:41, 11 October 2020 (UTC)