Talk:Hamilcar's victory with Naravas/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 10:28, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

GA Criteria

GA Criteria:

1
1.a Y

1.b Y
2
2.a Y

2.b Y

2.c Y

2.d Y
3
3.a Y

3.b Y
4
4.a Y
5
5.a Y
6
6.a Y

6.b Y

No DAB links Y
No dead links Y
No missing citations Y

Discussion

There is no ref for the footnote "Not to be confused with Hannibal Barca, of Second Punic War fame"; although this is technically only a requirement for FAC, it should be easy enough to slap one on.

Done.

All sources look good; initially had some concerns with Miles, Richard (2011) as he seemed to be something of a pop-historian, however reviews of his book by subject experts seem to find him reliable, if somewhat wordy.

Er, a professor of Roman history and archaeology and pro-vice-chancellor at Sydney University and a fellow of Trinity Hall, Cambridge is a "pop-historian"? Probably not. Made me smile though.

I was more concerned with the bit about BBC shows; hence the "seemed". He seems reliable, as is. Certainly some well-positioned professors have made some "interesting" claims. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:05, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Iazyges: Personally I have a fondness for academics who make an effort to make their subjects accessible to the wider public, but I understand that is not to everyone's taste. Any further comments on the GAN? And if you like the period, Battle of Oroscopa has just been nominated at GAN!

Gog the Mild (talk) 15:47, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, forgot I had not already passed this; passing now. I'll see if your article is still available once I've wrapped up Nabonidus. Pleasure as always. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 16:06, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Prose Suggestions

Please note that almost all of these are suggestions, and can be implemented or ignored at your discretion. Any changes I deem necessary for the article to pass GA standards I will bold.

Lede

and a group of Numidian cavalry under Naravas, shadowed it it may be prudent to mention Naravas' defection up in supported by Numidian cavalry led by Naravas, defeated a rebel army led by Spendius and Autaritus.; not a huge thing but I reread the two sentences about five times trying to figure out how to better word Naravas shadowing the enemy before realizing he used to be one of them a few lines later. Perhaps supported by defecting Numidian cavalry led by Naravas, defeated a rebel army led by Spendius and Autaritus.

Good point. I have gone for a fuller expalnation, which seems justified given the clumsy title of the article.

Background

Mutiny

The mutinous troops responded by demanding even more is it really an ancient history article if some form of this sentence doesn't appear?

In a review of a similar expression in an article from a different battle from this war the reviewer wrote something like. "No. Well I never. I'm shocked I tell you, shoked!"

eventually an additional 70,000 men according to the ancient Roman historian Polybius, although many would have been tied down in garrisoning their home towns against Carthaginian retribution. is it known what portion of the 20,000 mentioned earlier was in Africa by this point?

Pretty much all. Polybius assumes from here on that the rebels include 20,000 Sicilian veterans and that there are at least a few troops left in Sicily when the mutiny happens. Rounding I assume, plus who the heck knew to the nearest couple of thousand anyway?

Prelude

Carthaginian allegiance with varying mixtures of diplomacy and force. suggest changing mixtures to applications

But that changes the meaning. If you don't like "mixtures" (why not?) how about 'proportions'?

Aftermath

on a thin pretext, took them prisoner does this mean he found a reason to arrest the diplomatic party? If so I would mention that he broke diplomatic convention in doing so, as well as the reason itself, if it is known.

Ah, but he didn't break diplomatic convention. He found a thin pretext by which he could take them prisoner while staying just barely and arguably within the rough and ready rules of the time. Yeah, the reason is known, but I don't think that a paragraph on an event from a different battle is useful in this article. I'm trying for a summary style.

was to the north with the balance suggest changing balance to {{xt|remainder]}.

Changed to "rest". That ok?

@Gog the Mild: That is all my suggestions. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 11:14, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Iazyges, it is excellent to see you back. I hope that we shall be seeing a lot more of you. Many thanks for picking this one up. Your comments above all addressed, but do feel free to come back on anything you feel is not quite right. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:48, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]