Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cretan War

Cretan War

A war sandwhiched between two more famous war and with minimal sources. I have worked on this article for about 5 months now and I think it is of FA quality. Has had a military history peer review, a HOG peer review, a GA peer review and a general peer review. Kyriakos 08:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. (I did a little bit of work on this recently.) Very well done article on a tough topic. --Robth^Talk 21:25, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, looks good all around (after five A-Class reviews! ;-) Kirill Lokshin 00:23, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The article is far too verbose eg:

"The Macedonians then attacked the town of Thyatira and, after capturing it, advanced to the plain of Thebe, which they supposed would have the richest spoils.[13] Philip was disappointed in this hope, however, as his plundering there proved less fruitful than anticipated."

The above can be written in half the words:

After the Macedonians captured Thyatira, they advanced to plunder the plain of Thebe, but the booty proved less fruitful than anticipated.

The article could easily be halved in size without losing any detail.

There are spelling, typo and grammar mistakes.

The info box picture is in French! What’s the justification for the second picture? Raymond Palmer 05:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It should be pointed out, though, that artificially terse writing can be as unpleasant to read as the arificially verbose. The article is not overly long, per se, and does not need to be shortened regardless of the cost; any trimming of the text should thus be done carefully, to avoid losing valuable detail. Kirill Lokshin 05:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The map in the infobox was the best I could find and I also edited the article it a bit. Kyriakos 05:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kyriakos. If you would like me to adapt the picture using Paint Shop Pro, so its in English, I will do so tomorrow. Raymond Palmer 05:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'd greatly appreciate that. I also went through the article with spell check and got rid of most of the spelling mistakes. Kyriakos 05:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support and minor comment. Two of the citations do not have page numbers, but I think it is easy to fix that. Very nice article and worked in detail. I had reviewed the article in the past and did some minor minor copy-edit in the lead.--Yannismarou 09:48, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Cla68 12:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It would be nice if Image:Philip V Macedonia.png were recreated in English, though obviously not necessary. As the main image for the article, though, it's a bit odd to have a French-language map. —Cuivi é nen 17:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on it ATM Raymond Palmer 18:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The map is now in English Image:Macedonia and the Aegean World c.200.png. Raymond Palmer 23:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Great article, very comprehensive coverage. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 15:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support~~Weak oppose~~. There are still some unreferenced paras and major unreferenced sentences. Please increase the density of refs and I'd be happy to support.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 22:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like to comment on other people's comments, but I wanted to say something here: This article has at least one citation in each paragraph (sometimes even more). So, at first sight, it seems OK. And an editor is not obliged to cite each sentence. Sometimes a citation for two or three consecutive sentences is the same. Hence, I think that if Piotrus thinks that there is something uncited in the article, he should refer it specifically, so that other reviewers can understand the nature of his objection and so that the nominator can fix the problem. Thank!--Yannismarou 12:40, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I was reviewing the article there were still unreferenced paras. The density of refs is acceptable now, although I'd prefer to see more academic, secondary refs and less reliance on ancient primary sources.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 19:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Seems good to me - the inline citations are all present, and among the secondary literature there's at least a respected accomplishment of international scholarship, Green's history of the hellenistic era. Maybe another book, or two, strengthening the secondary literature would be good.--Aldux 18:23, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]