Wikipedia:Featured article review/Battle of Ceresole/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was delisted by DrKay via FACBot (talk) 7:09, 15 October 2022 (UTC) [1].
Battle of Ceresole[edit]
- Notified: Kirill Lokshin, WikiProject Military history, WikiProject Germany, WikiProject France, WikiProject Spain, WikiProject Italy, 2022-03-31,
Review section[edit]
I am nominating this featured article for review because there are concerns listed on the talk page about the overreliance and reliability of the Oman source. Concerns with the source were raised in the article's FAC, and the overreliance concern was raised in 2007 and 2008 on the article's talk page, and mentioned again in March 2022. I am opening this review to see if editors more familiar in this subject area can evaluate Oman's inclusion and/or find new sources to include in the article. I did a quick search databases and found potential new sources; I'm happy to list them below if anyone is interested in evaluating them and improving the article. Z1720 (talk) 16:54, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll update the article with newer sources over the next few days. I have the following on hand:
- Jones, Archer. The Art of War in the Western World. 1987.
- Knecht, R. J. Renaissance Warrior and Patron: The Reign of Francis I. 1994.
- Mallet, Michael and Christine Shaw. The Italian Wars, 1494–1559. 2012.
- Miller, Douglas. The Landsknechts. 1976.
- Potter, David. Renaissance France at War. 2008.
- Rogers, Clifford J. (ed.) The Military Revolution Debate. 1995.
- Sherer, Idan. The Scramble for Italy: Continuity and Change in the Italian Wars, 1494–1559. 2021.
- Turnbull, Stephen. The Art of Renaissance Warfare. 2006.
- Z1720, if there are any other potential sources you've been able to identify, that information would be much appreciated. Kirill Lokshin (talk) 17:43, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for responding to this Kirill. Here's some sources I found in academic journals. This isn't my specialty so I cannot evaluate the usefulness of these sources:
- Those are what I found in a search through the databases on WP:LIBRARY. I didn't search Google Scholar. Z1720 (talk) 18:06, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kirill Lokshin: are you still planning on editing this article? Is there anything others can do to help? Z1720 (talk) 00:26, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Z1720, thanks for the reminder; I have the updates drafted, and will add them to the article tomorrow. Kirill Lokshin (talk) 18:46, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Kirill, are you still planning on doing this? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:20, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Nikkimaria, unfortunately, it doesn't seem like I'm going to have any bandwidth for it at this point. My apologies. Kirill Lokshin (talk) 10:00, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Kirill, are you still planning on doing this? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:20, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC: Last edit was in March. A move to FARC doesn't stop improvements from being made to the article, nor does it prevent a potential keep designation later. Z1720 (talk) 04:58, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC, per Kirill. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:08, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC, with regret. Hog Farm Talk 01:53, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section[edit]
- Sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:11, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I have access to many of the sources needed here, and should be able to start tackling the article shortly. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:34, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, Oman is really hard to replace (I spent all morning looking in vain for what others have written about to replace him in the prelude section), I'm afraid my offer to here has to be withdrawn. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:27, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I have access to many of the sources needed here, and should be able to start tackling the article shortly. Amitchell125 (talk) 07:34, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist - I was really hoping this could be kept, but I don't have the sources to do this and it doesn't look like it's going to be able to be pushed across the hump. Hog Farm Talk 14:16, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, issues remain. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:54, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist per above (t · c) buidhe 03:21, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist sourcing issues remain. Z1720 (talk) 16:51, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. DrKay (talk) 17:09, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.