Talk:Battle of Gythium

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
More information... PEER This article is currently being peer reviewed.
Related task forces... Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC–c. 500 AD)

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject History of Greece; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ..
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. See comments

Battle of Gythium is a former good article candidate. There are suggestions below for which areas need improvement to satisfy the good article criteria. Once the objections are addressed, the article can be renominated as a good article. If you disagree with the objections, you can seek a review. Date of review: 11 November 2006

[edit] Failed "good article" nomination

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of November 11, 2006, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: There are several instances of ambiguity. I adressed some spelling and grammar issues in my copyedit, but there are things I dont know how to go about. For instance, you say: "1,000 picked warriors from Crete". What do you mean "picked"? Also, you mention the "Union of Free Laconians". What is that? You also seem to repeat some words, more specifically "the defenders became reinvigorated. The siege was proving more difficult until Flaminius arrived with 4,000 Roman soldiers.[13] With the arrival of the new soldiers, the allied soldiers were reinvigorated"

2. Factually accurate?: It appears accurate enough.

3. Broad in coverage?: Some points could bear with expanding, for instance the aftermath section.

4. Neutral point of view?: OK

5. Article stability? OK

6. Images?: OK

When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. Thanks for your work so far. --Druworos 11:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid I have to agree. I'd also suggest smoothing out the lead - it reads rather choppily and is hard to get through, which is bad in the first thing a reader is confronted with. Adam Cuerden ^talk 16:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notes

This is just minor, but I readjusted the footnotes to show multiple references to the same source under one title, as per Wikipedia:Footnotes#Citing_a_footnote_more_than_once. I also italicised the titles. Druworos 11:43, 12 November 2006 (UTC)