Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Maximian


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 01:35, 10 April 2008.

Maximian
Self-nomination. I've been working on this article for some time now, and I think that it's now more or less up to Featured Article standard. Comments welcome. Geuiwogbil (Talk) 06:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

Support Remarkably well-cited and referenced. -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 19:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

 Comments Support I've made a start on tidying up some of the prose. Feel free to revert. --FactotEm (talk) 14:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I've taken it up to and including the section on Campaigns in 286 and 287, but this section is confusing - I've dropped a note on the article talk page about it. That's all I have time for now - I'll try and come back to it again tomorrow. --FactotEm (talk) 16:17, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! Geuiwogbil (Talk) 18:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. I've done all I can do now, and there is of course no guarantee that my CE skills are up to scratch. In terms of content, the only question I have now is whether the sources permit the addition of a legacy section, of the sort that appears in the article on Diocletian. --FactotEm (talk) 19:51, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, no. I don't think there's much material. Where historians discuss the long-term changes made in this period, they attribute them to Diocletian. Geuiwogbil (Talk) 23:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. Just a couple of final comments then - in the Leisure and retirement section, the sentence "Had the date of the abdication been set at the meeting as 305, it would have given Maximian one more moment of glory as officiator over the Secular Games scheduled for 304." jars with "On May 1, 305, Diocletian and Maximian retired together..." that starts the next para. Also in the final para., and following on from the previous comments about the succession in the talk page, Licinius still pops up ("Although he led the ceremony that proclaimed Licinius Caesar..."). --FactotEm (talk) 09:12, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've made the final fixes. Geuiwogbil (Talk) 09:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * All issues I had have been addressed with comendable speed. Changed to support. --FactotEm (talk) 09:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * See also sections usually go before the footnotes
 * All other sources look good, and the links check out with the link checking tool. I'll try to get back later and do a fuller review. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've moved the "See also" section. Geuiwogbil (Talk) 18:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Oppose for now, mainly due to wordiness and some places where I'm unsure of the meaning. I'll be happy to switch to support when these have been addressed, and some more copyediting has been done. Switching to support, due to the wonderful copyedit by Roger and Dulcem. Wonderful article!


 * I did some copyediting, mainly to cut down wordiness, but I'm sure there are more spots I missed. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've hidden the above issues as they are resolved. I'd still like to see another copyedit, so leaving the oppose until Roger (who does a good job) has time. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, and to address the issues of the sources/accuracy, I didn't see anything glaringly wrong. While I'm not a trained ancient historian, the time frame is one of my interests, so I am at least familiar with the main subject matter. It might be a bit light on current journals, but it's very NPOV and sound in the scholarship it is ussing, at least as far as I can tell. No fringe theories, etc. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Switched to support, after the copyedit by Dulcem and Roger. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I only have access to a rather limited inter-library loan service and don't have access to any journals, electronic or otherwise. That said, if you have access to anything that could improve the article, and would be willing to e-mail it to me, I would gladly work its content into the article. Geuiwogbil (Talk) 01:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've addressed all your concerns but the general copy-edit. Roger Davies has said he'll give the article a copy-edit sometime today. Geuiwogbil (Talk) 19:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * For the avoidance of doubt, here's what I said
 * "Nope, not entirely. I'm not happy with: (1) the choppiness of some sections; (2) the copy habit of telling people what you're going to say before you say it and (3) lack of clarity in places. Rather than doing a copy-edit by proxy (long lists of things to fix, which are then duly fixed), I'll give it a copy edit myself starting either this afternoon/evening or tomorrow morning. this'll probably take 24 hours or so to complete. I'm light on sources for this period though so it will style only. Fair enough? -- R OGER D AVIES talk 09:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)"
 * It looks like tomorrow morning. I have a fair number of other commitments at the moment :) -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 23:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: I really like this. I've gone ahead and copy edited the article, although I think it was already in pretty good shape after Roger went through it. My remaining concern is that there are some places where the passive voice obfuscates the sources of certain beliefs about Maximian. Some examples (my print out is from before Roger and I copy edited things, so some of these may have been changed):
 * "Some historians speculate that Maximian and Diocletian arranged their eventual roles before Diocletian's rise to power . . . ."
 * "Maximian's swift appointment by Diocletian as Caesar is taken by the writer Stephen Williams and historian Timothy Barnes to mean that the two men were longterm allies, that their respective roles were pre-agreed and that Maximian had probably supported Diocletian during his campaign against Carinus (r. 283–285) but there is no direct evidence for this."
 * "It has been postulated that she was born from an earlier marriage between Eutropia and Afranius Hannibalianus."
 * Attributed.
 * "Some suggest that less flattering reasons were also influential . . . . "
 * Attributed.
 * "Some historians state that Diocletian, like childless emperors before him, adopted Maximian as his filius Augusti . . . . "
 * Attributed.
 * "It has been suggested that the rebels were not merely peasants, but combatants for Gallic political autonomy . . . ."
 * Attributed.
 * "The emperors Probus and Carinus had begun work on fortifications along the so-called Saxon Shore . . . ." (So-called by whom)
 * Dropped the "so-called".
 * "Diocletian could not have been present at Maximian's appointment, causing some to suggest that Maximian usurped the title . . . . "
 * Attributed.
 * "It has been surmised that the ceremonies were arranged to demonstrate Diocletian's continuing support for his faltering colleage."
 * Attributed.
 * "Maximian was more aggressive in his relationship with the Senate than Constantius, and is alleged to have terrorized the istitution . . . ."
 * Attributed.
 * In all of these cases, I want to know who is doing the alleging, surmising, postulating, suggesting, etc. If these sentences are recast in the active voice so as to attribute their sources, I'll happily support. — Dulcem (talk) 06:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Attributions made. Geuiwogbil (Talk) 07:38, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Support. I'd like to see Roger given enough time to finish his copy edit, of course, but I'm happy with the article. — Dulcem (talk) 09:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I haven't finished copy-editing it yet. It'll take a day or two more, I think. I'm posing questions myself as I go so it's not just a matter of shunting words around unfortunately :) -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 07:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've finished it now. (Please check it for my typos :) -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 19:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.