Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Siege

Siege
(Contested -- July 6) 

This was last week's Article of the Week. (I worked on it, so that makes it a self nom, I suppose). It's extremely informative and well written. Includes multiple pictures, and has been read by many pairs of eyes. &rarr;Raul654 20:58, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC) (info: Article_of_the_week/History)
 * Object. That picture of the Siege of Leningrad still lacks copyright info.  I've dropped a note on the talk page of the user who uploaded it, but I'd like to get it resolved. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 21:01, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I had a feeling this was going to come up. For the sake of expediency, I have removed the image in question. &rarr;Raul654 21:07, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Object. Great article! 1) I found the start of one paragraph in the lead section quite confusing: "the great Swedish white-elephant fortification of Karlsborg was completed in 1869. One single fortified stronghold, whatever the scale (Karlsborg was conceived as a reserve capital for Sweden), was no longer decisive." &mdash; could we reword and add a little more detail to make this a little clearer? 2) In the "Mongol" section, there's a huge quote, and it's not primarily about sieges per se (although it's discussed) ; could this quote be either trimmed down drastically, or summarised ourselves, or both? 3) The article could do with a little more illustration, and I'm sure we can easily find material: for example, in the "New styles of fortresses employed" subsection, we might be able to find an image or diagram of a fortress that's has one of these designs against cannon fire; also one or two pictures of things like glacis, siege towers and so on would really spice up the article. 4) Are there any recent examples of sieges that could be mentioned? The most recent one in the article (unless I missed something) is the battle of Khe Sanh (1968). &mdash; Matt 22:46, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I shortened the Mongol section and removed off-topic info. I also refactored the modern seieges paragraph to make it more on-topic. &rarr;Raul654 22:38, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Re: More modern sieges - I don't think it'd be bragging to say a know a fair amount about the history of modern warfare, and I honestly can't think of a single clearcut example of a more modern siege than Khe Sahn. You could put forth arguements for the fighting in Tora Bora, Afghanistan and Fallujah, Iraq, but those are stretching the definition a great deal. &rarr;Raul654 23:40, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Sure, I've struck that objection. &mdash; Matt 23:49, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * As per the objection below, I have added a picture of Cahir Castle. &rarr;Raul654 00:19, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * PS - I have also added a diagram of a Vauban fortress. &rarr;Raul654 07:21, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Object. This article looks great, but I have some objections. You'll have my support once these are fixed (or when I'm convinced my objections are invalid) Jeronimo 22:43, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Only a few sieges are named specifically. I know there's a list of sieges, but some of the really famous sieges could be addressed in this article. Which sieges brought "breaktroughs" or "records" in the field of sieging? Any major sieges that failed?
 * Is there any way to give an indication about how successful sieges have been through the ages? I'm not asking for percentages, just a general indication? Did nearly all of them fail or succeed, or was it more fifty-fifty? How did this evolve? Parts of these are already present in the text, but may it could be more explicit?
 * It would be clearer to state the links in full, rather than just linking the city that was besieged. Battle of Dien Bien Phu is much clearer than battle of Dien Bien Phu, which suggests it links to an article about the city, not the battle.
 * "The battles of Dien Bien Phu (1954) and Khe Sanh (1968)" - how is this confusing in the least? It specifically says "The battles of". If there were only one listed there, it would make sense to link the whole phrase, but since there is more than one, this is the best way to do it. &rarr;Raul654 22:48, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't agree, but I'll not make this a problem, and will strike my objection on this point.Jeronimo 07:12, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * In the lead section, there's talk of nations under siege, but this topic isn't really addressed in the remainder of the article. Some more words might be spent on this.
 * I have refactored that section as per Matt's objection above. &rarr;Raul654 22:49, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * OK. Jeronimo 07:12, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * There's an image of a trebuchet as a siege-breaking instrument; it would be interesting to have an photo of a fortification (perhaps de Krak des Chevaliers, or some other famous castle?). This is not part of my objection, merely a suggestion.
 * Picture of Cahir Castle added. &rarr;Raul654 00:19, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Great. Jeronimo 07:12, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * First of all, I'd like to thank everyone who worked on this. I nominated it because I thought it would be an interesting article, and you didn't disappoint.  That said, it needs a certain something.  1) There's very little specific about medieval or especially pre-medieval sieges. 2) The extended section about specific types of fortifications in "Marshall Vauban" cries out for a diagram. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 23:10, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * My addition of two pictures (one of Cahir Castle and a diagram of a Vauban fortress) should eliminated your 2nd objection. &rarr;Raul654 07:23, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Well done! I think I can support now, though I still wouldn't mind seeing more specific info/description on pre-medieval sieges. Support. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 13:28, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Object (easy to fix) - the lead section is too long for an article of this size (well any size since a max of three paras is recommended). I suggest some condensing (the current lead is the length I would expect to find under a ==Siege warfare== section at warfare). --mav 10:31, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Intro concise-ified. &rarr;Raul654 06:26, Jul 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * Much better - support. --mav 02:10, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Support. &mdash; Matt 02:07, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)