Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Skanderbeg's Italian expedition

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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.
Closing as consensus to promote, Woody (talk) 10:24, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Skanderbeg's Italian expedition[edit]

Nominator(s): Gaius Claudius Nero (talk)


Toolbox

This article has gone through both a GA Review and a Peer Review. I would like to confirm that it meets the criteria for A-class. I will be willing to fix any problems present in the article. I have put a lot of work -- and am willing to put in more -- into it and would like to see it pass an A-class review. Regards, Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 21:54, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments
The article is well cited and seems to be well written from what I have reviewed so far. Could you try to clarify some text in the Lead. This sentence: "Before reaching Italy, Skanderbeg visited Ragusa (Dubrovnik) where he negotiated financial terms with its rectors." is a bit unclear to me. From the text in the body of the article this seems to be a peace settlement deal. Thanks. More to follow.. -Fnlayson (talk) 17:26, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for deciding to review this article. I look forward to your continued comments. I have revised the sentence as follows: "Before reaching Italy, Skanderbeg visited Ragusa (Dubrovnik) to convince its rectors to help fund his campaign." How is that?--Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 20:17, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Comments: I'm afraid I can't comment on the content, so I've concentrated mainly on technical issues:
    • no dab links, ext links work (no action required);
    • the Earwig tool reports no copyright violation: [1] (no action required);
    • images lack alt text, you might consider adding it in (suggestion only, not a A-class requirement);
    • I think "File:Map of Ragusa.jpg" needs the licencing information translated into English on the description page - this might be an issue if you take it to FAC;
    • "File:Monte sant'angelo castle old.jpg" on the description page, author, date and description information are missing - this might be an issue if you take it to FAC;
    • in the infobox where it says "Part of the Neopolitan war of succession" - is there an article that this could be linked to for context?
    • the Advisor script reports that the ISBN for the Francione work might not be correct, can you please check this?
    • in the References, if possible, please try to add locations for the publishers. You can usually find these at Worldcat.org;
    • in the References, the titles in English should be capitalised in accordance with WP:MOSCAPS#Composition titles. For instance: "The Italo-Albanian villages of southern Italy" should be "The Italo-Albanian Villages of Southern Italy";
    • in the Notes there is "Franco 1480", however in the References the date of publication is given as "1539" - this should be consistent;
    • watch out for overlinking of terms. For instance, in the lead "Ottoman Empire" is linked twice.
    • in the section heading, is this a typo: "Neopolitan counteroffensive"? Should it be "Neapolitan counteroffensive"? AustralianRupert (talk) 00:45, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      •  Done Thanks for the review by the way. Let me know if you have any more concerns.Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 21:00, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've read through the article a couple more times now and have the following prose suggestions/comments:
    • in the Background, I'm slightly confused by this: "to secure the pope's interests, Skanderbeg sent twelve Turkish prisoners of war that had been captured at Albulena". Where were the prisoners of war sent?
    • in the Background, this sounds awkward to me: "convince them to end their conflicts between each other and to unite under Calixtus' crusade" (perhaps reword to: "convince them to stop fighting each other and unite for Calixtus' crusade");
    • in the Background section, the paragraph begins in 1457, but ends discussing something that occured in 1456, it might be best to reorganise this paragraph so that it is in chronological order;
    • in the Italian situation subsection: "fell into Pius's hands." Generally if a word ends with 's' and possession is denoted, the second s can be left off. E.g. "Pius' hands";
    • in the Albanian situation section: "Constant news of Ottoman campaigns against Bosnia and Morea but not against Albania seemed to suggest..." (Suggest to whom? This might need to be clarified);
    • where you use distances such as miles, it might be a good idea to use a conversion template. Some readers can't conceptualise miles, but can conceptualise kilometres. If you add {{convert|30|mi|km}} or for a range {{convert|30|-|40|mi|km}} it will automatically do the conversion and display both figures;
    • in the First landings section, I think there is a missing word here: "his nephew, Constantine, who at the time was 22–23 year-old" (suggest either "was 22-23 years old" or "was a 22-23 year old");
    • in the First landings section, I suggest wikilinking "cuirassed" to an appropriate article. Perhaps to "Cuirass";
    • in the First landings section, "René d'Anjou had been particularly surprised by Skanderbeg's action since he had never offended the Albanian" (perhaps include the modifier "...since he believed that he had never offended the Albanian".
    • in the Orsini-Skanderbeg correspondence section, this sounds a little awkward: "and had grown an admiration for Skanderbeg and his campaigns in Albania" (perhaps reword to: "and had developed an admiration for Skanderbeg and his campaigns in Albania");
    • is there a link that could be provided for the term "ducats"?
    • in the Neapolitan counteroffensive section, there is some redundancy here: "annually from which most of Piccinino's pay came from" (the last "from" is not necessary);
    • is there a link that could be provided for the term "florins"?
    • in the Preparations section, I not sure of this wording: "He was still awaiting a grain of supply and two Neapolitan ships" (what is a grain of supply? or should this be "a supply of grain"?);
    • in the Preparations section, there is inconsistent spelling here: "Barleta" and "Barletta";
    • in the Preparations section, there appears to be a word missing here: "Skanderbeg set off for Apulia, but a storm forced to anchor off a Dalmatian island" (perhaps "but a storm forced him to anchor off a Dalmation island");
    • in the Aftermath, I think there is a word missing here: "On 27 April 1463, Skanderbeg and Mehmed signed a new peace" (perhaps add the word "treaty" after "peace"). AustralianRupert (talk) 03:16, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments

Also not a specialist so can only give a few comments

    • The Battle of Orsara should link in the lead, as first occurence. I note there is no article on the battle itself - you may wish to consider a stub for that purpose to link to, or put more detail later in the text
    • The last sentence in First landings is a little clunky (though the meaning is clear)
    • The meaning of the first line of Skanderbeg in Italy is unclear - do you mean they remained militarily active?
    • Who is referred to in the first sentence of the middle paragraph? Piccinino, Orsini or both? The sentence begins with condottieri (plural) but the second half of the sentence says "his".
    • There seems to be a contradiction between the lead and the middle para of Aftermath. In the former, Albanians fight in the battle of Orsara, in the latter it is uncertain.

And thanks for the review.Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 21:10, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a couple of minor copy edits I noticed because it was easier than describing where they were.

Best wishes Monstrelet (talk) 08:19, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Support for half of it on prose and MOS per standard disclaimer, down to where I stopped, at Skanderbeg's_Italian_expedition#Orsini–Skanderbeg correspondence. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 15:12, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They look great so far. Looking forward to the rest. :) --Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 01:41, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Good job Gaius Claudius. My comments from Peer review are mostly solved, and the article was improved much more. Congratulation! --Kebeta (talk) 11:51, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Skanderbeg%27s_Italian_expedition&oldid=428730004"