Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Saseno/archive2

Battle of Saseno

 * Nominator(s): Constantine  ✍  10:55, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

This article is about a naval clash between the Venetians and their perennial rivals, the Genoese, in which a Venetian trade convoy was intercepted and destroyed, via a clever ruse, during the War of Saint Sabas. It passed GA and the MILHIST ACR in 2020, and was already submitted for a first FAC in 2021, but it failed there due to me being unavailable to pursue its completion. I have already taken the comments there on board, and look forward to any further suggestions for improvement. Constantine  ✍  10:55, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Comments

 * "So far in the war, the Genoese had experienced" - worth mentioning how long it had been going on for? If it had been going on for only six weeks then Genoa having experienced only defeats would be a very different kettle of fish to if it had been going on for six years
 * Very good point, changed.
 * "The much more manoeuvreable Genoese galleys captured or sunk" => "The much more manoeuvreable Genoese galleys captured or sank"
 * Fixed.
 * "their construction had been funded by public funds" - any way to avoid that repetition?
 * Fixed.
 * "The Guelph nobles joined and attacked Grillo's house" => "The Guelph nobles joined together and attacked Grillo's house" as current wording reads like they both joined the house and attacked it
 * Fixed.
 * "The command of the convoy was entrusted to Michele Duaro or Doro" - I'd be tempted to move the alternative spelling of his name to a footnote to avoid any slight suggestion that you are talking about two different men
 * Done.
 * "Another galley was sent east; according to" - think that semi-colon should be a comma
 * Fixed.
 * "The Venetian sources claim that the departing crews sunk" => "The Venetian sources claim that the departing crews sank"
 * Fixed.
 * "ultimately Duaro preferred to save [...] to a doomed" - I think ""ultimately Duaro preferred saving [...] to a doomed"" would read better
 * Fixed.
 * That's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:55, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggested corrections, ,! Anything else, even beyond FA requirements? Constantine  ✍  20:25, 20 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:07, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Support from Gog the Mild
Hi Constantine, I hope to get round to reviewing this. Before I do, could you confirm that all of the issues I brought up during the article's first nomination have been addressed? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi ! Had another look, and dealt with a few issues that were still outstanding, or possibly not entirely clear. There are a couple of points where I am unable to give an answer, notably an equivalent value for the plunder taken. I am still searching for a good source that would give an equivalence either in USD or in some sort of analogue (e.g. average wage). So far I have some sources about the 12th century, but nothing contemporary with events. Constantine  ✍  16:51, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Strike my last, I managed to track down a reliable source with some contemporary numbers for the costs of ships, that offers a baseline for comparison. Constantine  ✍  18:11, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 19:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Foreign words in the infobox also need to be in lang templates.
 * Fixed.
 * "free to attack the Venetian convoy". "The convoy"? This is the first we have heard of it. Perhaps "the" → 'a'?
 * Fixed.
 * "the obligation of keeping" → 'the obligation to keep'.
 * Fixed.
 * "the spring trade convoy to the Levant was left as the only outlet for the Venetian merchants' activities." "only"? What about the late-summer convoy?
 * Fixed.
 * "and swiftly headed south". I think you mean 'and headed swiftly south'.
 * Indeed, changed.
 * "The commander of the convoy, Duaro, appears to have made slow progress". Perhaps add 'Venetian' before "convoy", to help those who haven't been paying attention.
 * Excellent point, done.
 * "The Annales Ianuenses on the other hand reports that all the lighter ships were captured, apart from a nave, which was sunk, and a tarida which was lost to fire. On the other hand, the Roccafortis held firm." Perhaps avoid the repetition of "on the other hand".
 * Done
 * "100,000 Genoese pounds". Consider putting the price comparisons in the main article.
 * Done.
 * "a doomed stand to the end". The usual phrase is 'fight to the end'.
 * Fixed.
 * Hello again, your comments have been addressed. Thanks for your time, twice over :) Constantine  ✍  07:54, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * No worries. It's a pleasure to see another of your high quality articles at FAC. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:46, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Support Comments from Iazyges
Will begin reviewing soon. Iazyges  Consermonor   Opus meum  00:56, 22 February 2023 (UTC) Hi and thanks :). I have addressed the two troublespots. Constantine   ✍  17:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * "where Duaro rallied his crews for safety" the meaning of this is not quite clear, I think. From just the lede I would assume that the commander motivated this singular ship so strongly that they fought off enemies, but it doesn't encapsulate that he gave up on the other ships in the process. Perhaps "where Duaro rallied the crews of his fleet for safety, abandoning the other ships in the process.", or something similar.
 * Good point, changed.
 * "rather than by private contractors (usually the rich noble merchants who ran the city) as was normal practice" feel like commas may be more useful than the parenthesis in this situation.
 * Hmmm, commas don't really work, as this is a clarification; have replaced with emdashes though.
 * That's all I have; an excellent article. Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  20:11, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Happy to support. Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  17:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Comments Support by Borsoka

 * ...Romania (the lands of the Eastern Roman or Byzantine Empire)... The term "Romania" refers to the Latin Empire of Constantinople, according to the cited source.
 * "Romania" was the lands of the Byzantine Empire, which was (supposed to be) supplanted by the Latin Empire. Hence Partitio Romaniae. 'Romania' thus meant the Greek East in its late Byzantine form. Have added a more accurate citation from Lane to that effect.
 * Consider mentioning that the Venetians had a commercial monopoly in the Latin Empire.
 * Done. Have used the opportunity to add a bit of context as well.
 * Grillo set sail in June, and headed swiftly south towards Malta... Define Malta as an island and link it to Malta (island).
 * Done.
 * Consider introducing Tyre as "the second-most important port city of the Levant" when it is first mentioned. Borsoka (talk) 05:39, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Have labelled Tyre 'port city' on first occurrenc, as the explanation IMO works best when discussing Barozzi's motives. Have also rephrased the rest slightly.
 * Hello . Thanks for the comments, they have been addressed. Anything else? Constantine  ✍  12:04, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Happy to support this nice and exceptionally well written article. Borsoka (talk) 02:25, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Source review
The only thing I can find to ask about is the three old sources: Caro, Manfroni, and Wiel. Can you confirm that these are still regarded as reliable by modern historians? -- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:04, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Manfroni is very much still the standard work on the topic, and most generalist modern treatments of the period and the conflict provide rehashes of his work (Dotson is an exception in this regard, providing his own conclusions, but only on specific events). Caro is a bit dated, but AFAICT not on the narrative history (I am by no means an expert on Genoese history, but my impression is he was the first modern historian to provide a comprehensive narrative about Genoa's political history in that period). He is also still cited in modern works. Wiel is possibly an outlier: it is the only English-language account of the topic that is accessible, and although written as what we would now term popular history, I think it holds up pretty well. The work relies heavily on Manfroni, sometimes to the point of identical phrasing, so what applies for Manfroni applies here as well in terms of up-to-date scholarship. Constantine  ✍  11:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Good enough. Pass. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 12:14, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Image review - pass
All images are appropriately licenced, positioned, captioned and alt texted. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:14, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 21:29, 11 March 2023 (UTC)