Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Sarantaporo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleBattle of Sarantaporo 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
November 27, 2019Good article nomineeListed
April 27, 2020WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
Current status: Good article

Background

[edit]

Are the dates Gregorian or Julian? This page shows Montenegro declaring war on September 25, but elsewhere in Wikipedia, it's October 8th. On the First Balkan War page, the list of battles shows Battle of Sarantaporo occurring on October 22, not October 9 -10. Jtyroler (talk) 01:22, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Battle of Sarantaporo isn't Commom use

[edit]

Battle of Sarantaporo isn't Commom use in English language.

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL

  • Battle of Sarandaporon
    • Walter Harrington Crawfurd Price, The Balkan Cockpit - The Political and Military Story of the Balkan Wars in Macedonia, Read Books, 2008, ISBN 9781443774048, p. 58.
    • Demetrius John Cassavetti, Hellas and the Balkan wars, T. F. Unwin, 1914, p. 96, 164.

Takabeg (talk) 10:39, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For heaven's sake, these are just different ways to transliterate the same name, Σαραντάπορο(ν). You are raising noise for a pedantic non-issue here. Constantine 14:09, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:37, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 14:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I'll take a look at this. Give me a couple of days. To be going on with, re images:

  • The map: "Source" means where did the information on the map come from, which was probably a book.
Good stuff. Thanks.
  • The lithograph: Needs a US PD tag. And "Source" in this case means where did you find the image which you self scanned? Again possibly a book.
  • The medal: I assume that you mean that you have an image of the medal, rather than the actual medal? If so, then see immediately above.

Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I have done a little copy editing which you will want to check. If you are unhappy with any of it, please flag it up here.

  • You start your list of divisions with "the 1st Infantry Division". Each of the other divisions needs 'the' in front of it.
 Done
  • "and the reserve (redif) Nasliç and Aydın Reserve Divisions" This seems a bit inconsistent. Are you sure that the Aydın Division had "Reserve" in its name? And that the Nasliç Division didn't?
Removed the extraneous Reserve.--Catlemur (talk) 20:42, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "locating the headquarters of the VIII Provisional Corps at Hania Viglas and those of a reserve division at Glikovo" Are these Ottoman or Greek units? If Ottoman, could you say so?
Those are Ottoman units whose positions were located by Greek patrols, I added Ottoman in front of the VIII Provisional Corps again.--Catlemur (talk) 20:42, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Having ceded Thessaly to Greece in the aftermath of the Convention of Constantinople" I thought that Thessaly was ceded by the Convention, and in the aftermath of the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878?
Replaced with "Having ceded Thessaly to Greece in the Convention of Constantinople (1881)".--Catlemur (talk) 20:42, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild (talk) 20:15, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That all seems good. A little more copy editing from me for you to check that you are happy with.

  • A sentence or two at the end stating how the war ended would be useful?
I wrote a couple of sentences on how the war's conclusion.--Catlemur (talk) 16:42, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have tweaked the language a little. Could you check that you are happy with my changes?
  • Cite 7: a hyphen in the page range.
 Done
  • Katsikostas: the English translation of the title should be in title case.
 Done

I shall have another read through, but apart from this it seems good to me. A well put together article. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:09, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good work. Nice article. Promoting. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:48, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed