Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Second Punic War

No consensus to promote at this time - Gog the Mild (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 19:20, 18 October 2020 (UTC) &laquo; Return to A-Class review list

Second Punic War
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
 * Nominator(s): 

To round out my attempt to improve the top level articles on the Punic Wars I would like to push this one above Good Article status. I have struggled with it a little, perhaps because there is so much going on - Hannibal over the Alps, Cannae, Zama, Scipio Africanus etc. So any and all comments would be gratefully received; including, if felt appropriate, that I should drop the stick. Thanks in advance. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Image and source reviews

 * Image review—pass
 * The only issue here is the coins, which I nominated for deletion at Commons. Coins are not purely two-dimensional, and this photograph does not appear to be released under a free license. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  14:34, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I missed that. From memory, which may be faulty, T8612 added that image. Hi, any comments or information on the licensing of the photograph (not the coin)? If not, what do you think of replacing it with File:Carthage, quarter shekel, 237-209 BC, SNG BM Spain 102.jpg? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:57, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, np. This one is a quarter-sheckel though, so you will have to change the caption. T8612  (talk) 15:24, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, good spot and apologies for missing it. Swapped for another, similar, but better licensed coin. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:56, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

(t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:42, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Source review
 * The sources all look OK to me in terms of reliability
 * Hoyos 2015: Hoyos is only the author of parts of the book. The sections which are cited should be enumerated in the bibliography.
 * p. 122 n.. Citation is missing something
 * Source checks
 * I have made some minor adjustments to page ranges
 * Edwell
 * "A rushed Carthaginian attack in late 218BC was beaten off at the Battle of Cissa." Cissa is not mentioned on the cited page of Edwell.
 * Important details such as "29 Carthaginian ships lost" and "55 Roman and Massalian vessels" are not to be found in Edwell, the only source cited
 * "Hasdrubal received orders from Carthage..." most of this is not supported by the cited source.
 * "thinned-out center" "taking heavy losses themselves." not supported
 * "In 213 BC Syphax, a powerful Numidian king in North Africa, declared for Rome. In response, Roman advisers were sent to train his soldiers and he waged war against the Carthaginian ally Gala." most of this is not supported by the cited source
 * "although many of them were subsequently to fight against the Romans" source does not say this explicitly.
 * "It captured several Roman-garrisoned towns on Sicily; many Roman garrisons were either expelled or massacred by Carthaginian partisans." not in source
 * " Archimedes was killed by a Roman soldier" not in source
 * Rawlings
 * "the Carthaginians' key ally in Italy. In 211 BC Hannibal attempted to lure the Romans into a pitched battle, but was unsuccessful; and was also unable to lift the siege by assaulting the besiegers' defences." "hoping in to compel the Romans to abandon the siege in order to defend their home city. However, only part of the besieging force left for Rome and Capua fell soon afterwards." not in the source.
 * "In 210 the Carthaginians caught the Romans off guard during their siege of Herdonia and lifted the siege after a pitched battle in which the Romans lost 13,000 men from their army of 20,000" The source does mention a siege of Herdonia in 210, but the rest is not supported
 * "Hannibal then fought the inconclusive Battle of Numistro, but the Romans stayed on his heels, fighting the also inconclusive Battle of Canusium in 209 BC." Both battles are mentioned but not the other details.
 * "In 212 BC a Roman army was ambushed,[where?][by whom?] losing 15,000 of their 16,000 men" not in source, as far as I can tell
 * I did not check the rest of the citations to Rawlings
 * Overall, there are some significant issues with verifiability here.