Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Triarii


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

No consensus to promote at this time - AustralianRupert (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 01:06, 9 November 2016 (UTC) &laquo; Return to A-Class review list

Triarii

 * Nominator(s): Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum 

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because I am trying to bring all of the manipular roman types of soldiers up to A class. Iazyges  Consermonor   Opus meum  08:24, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Comments: G'day, not an area I know much (if anything) about, but I had a read through and have some minor comments/suggestions, which might hopefully help a little, at least: AustralianRupert (talk) 07:10, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * non internet sources do not require "retrieved" or accessdates;
 * "Autores selectos de la mas pura latinidad..." could the translation be provided here? The "|trans_title=" parameter in the cite book template could be used here;
 * titles of works should use title case capitalization, e.g. "Lectures on the history of Rome" --> "Lectures on the History of Rome"
 * "This was supposedly a common practice." --> this should be attributed in text, and a citation provided, e.g. "According to the historian, John Smith, this was a common practice.[11]"
 * the article currently appears to have a mixture of US and British English variation. Either is fine, IMO, but consistency is important. For instance, "armour" (British) and "armor" (US);
 * the Google link for the Gaspar ref should be embedded so that it appears as a link with the title of the source, rather than a numbered link


 * References do not need the repetition of the full details of a source each time it is used. So Southern (2007), p.x after the first instance. Monstrelet (talk) 14:28, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Iazyges has nominated four articles on ancient Roman military history, Principes, Triarii, Hastati and Velites. All were taken through GA in 2008 by an editor who ceased editing in 2011. I have looked in detail at Velites. My initial impression was that the content is OK but not the referencing, but when I checked the sources I found that the original editor had misinterpreted them on several important points. Iazyges does not have access to the sources, but has made considerable improvements to Velites in response to my comments, and is looking for reliable sources to bring the article up to A-Class standard. I would therefore suggest that Velites should be kept as a candidate, but it would be better if the other three are withdrawn, as they almost certainly need a complete re-write to get them to the standard to be considered for A-Class. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:04, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The comment below has been copied from MilHist Talk: Dudley Miles (talk) 21:50, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comment, Dudley. Are you happy with withdrawing this as an A-class candidate for the timebeing? If so, I will organize for the review to be archived. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:18, 9 November 2016 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.