GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Johannes Schade ( talk · contribs) 09:41, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Welcome
Ave
User:Cerebellum and
User:Ifly6: I will be your reviewer for this, the second GA nomination of the article
Gaius Marius. I am an apprentice-reviewer much less experienced than either of the nominators (Ifly6 has only 1742 edits; but definitively is a subject-expert). Please tell me when I go wrong. I see you nominated the article on 9 January 2022. I see it is rated "B" at present. The prose is 51 kB (8395 words), WP:SIZERULE says ">50 k: May need to be divided". I applied the Rater script the article, which calls ORES which rated your article "B or higher" with a confidence of 92.7%. This sounds all very positive. I start reading now. Best regards,
Johannes Schade (
talk)
09:41, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
The 6 GA criteria (WP:GA?) 1. Well written a) Clear, concise, understandable, grammatical, and correctly spelled. b) MOS:LEADLENGTH, MOS:LAYOUT, MOS:WTW, WP:WAF, & MOS:LIST 2. Verifiable and no original research a) Notes, citations, & references MOS:NOTES b) Inline citations c} WP:OR d) Copyright violations and plagiarisms 3. Broad coverage a) Main aspects b) Focused 4. Neutral 5. Stable 6. Illustrated a) Copyright b) Relevant and captions
I start a first traverse.
|Image=
- The image is problematic because of the doubts about the identity of its sitter, why did you avoid using the photo of the Chiaramonti Marius (Musei Vaticani) that appears further down? If you keep the present image, it might be necessary to provide a citation for the claim that it might represent Scipio Asiaticus.Etcheto, Henri (2012)and footquote (WP:FOOTQUOTE), but why do you use <ref></ref> instead of
Sfn? Let us sort this out before going further. Johannes Schade ( talk) 16:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Sfn. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 17:21, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
|Alt=
- White bust. This sculpture is somewhere between a bust and a head as it shows very little of the shoulders. Perhaps the Alt text should give more detail.
Alternative text should be short, such as "A basketball player" or "Tony Blair shakes hands with George W. Bush".How about
Scuplture of a man's head and a small part of his shoulders? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 12:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Latin town of Arpinum. - The article Arpino says "Connected with the Pelasgi, the Volsci and Samnite people".
southern Latium. - I would call it "south-east Latium".
|url=
and {Para|oclc}} and content yourself with |isbn=
. I feel a |url=
should never point to WorldCat and if |isbn=
is given |oclc=
should be omitted. I would guess: ifly6=Richard John Evans.Hildinger 2002, p. 59. - This book is in Internet Archive at https://archive.org/details/swordsagainstsen0000hild/. It is incredible what IA all has! Please change this source from Google Books to IA. I suggested above to remove OCLC when ISBN is available, but if you want to give both, please do so. There is no rule against this in Wikipedia. Since you are again generously giving a footquote, may I ask you : why do you write "ps=. ", resulting in ". " in the footquote and not ": ", resulting in ": "? You probably have thought about this. I think it is not the first time I see it done like this. I also like to give my readers footquotes but I always write "ps=: " (see Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty) to see how I do it. With many thanks and best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 16:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Evans, Richard (2008). - Why do you implement your citations mostly with {{ Sfn}} but then sometimes also with <ref></ref> instead. Both are accepted for GA purposes but I think they should not be mixed haphazardly. Or is there some order and method in this? (I personally by far prefer {{ Sfn}}).
Wikipedia's guidelines generally prohibit editors from changing from one acceptable form of inline citations to another without consensus, especially for reasons of personal preference or to make one article match the style in another article.. See Template:Citation style. Also, thanks, Cerebellum for doing the grunt work of normalising the citations. Ifly6 ( talk) 19:46, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
praetor. - I suggest replacing "praetor" with "a praetor" in "He was elected as praetor for 102&BC" as there were more than one praetor in office at the same time, which the reader might not know.
Conti, Flavio (2003). - Another citation implemented with <ref></ref>.
While he was serving. - "While serving" might be sufficient." Johannes Schade ( talk) 16:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
This connection may be. - I suggest simply: "this may be".
March under the yoke. - would not "pass under the yoke" be a better translation for sub iugum mittere? See the illustration in the article Tigurini. The yoke remains in place, the Roman soldiers pass through bending deeply under the yoke.
More to come, best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 21:56, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Caecilii Metelli. - Are the "Caecilii Metelli" a specific branch of the Metelli? Why "Caecilii"?
Jugurthine War. - We are in a section "Subordinate of Metellus". There is a section "Run for the Consulship" and then a section "Jugurthine War" further dow. It seems we are in plain Jugurthine War long before the start of the corresponding section. This is confusing.
Metellus'. - Possessive singular, not plural: Metellus'-> Metellus's; Marius'-> Marius's. (see e.g. William Strunk, The Elements of Style).
Xius's. That said, in classics books, you will not find this commonly followed (I am sure there are those who do follow it). I changed merely to avoid a meaningless argument, not because "we do agree after all". Possessives are almost always without trailing s. Eg:
Marius', which while acceptable in classical scholarship, is also outside of BrE conventions). I reverted my comment when I re-read your comment and realised what it actually meant. Ifly6 ( talk) 01:11, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Sallust 1921, 48–55. - This cites Sallust's Jugurthine War from a website. I do not know what the loc=48–55 means. The cited website shows subdivisions ("paragraphs") 1–35. I therefore do not know which part of the text you are trying to cite. Like it already was the case with Plutarch above, it would be much better to cite Sallust from an online book than from a website. See https://archive.org/details/L116LacusCurtiusSallustWarWithCatilineWarWithJugurtha/page/n155/
|at=1.2.3
rather than directly to the page numbers, because those page numbers are basically useless given the plethora of different reprints, editions, etc. Basically all 1850+ editions are indexed both on pages and on the paragraph numbers.
Ifly6 (
talk)
20:32, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph: campaign 20 years in the future
. - How do you come to precisely 20 years?
2nd paragraph: Marius was supposedly unhappy
. - I suggest a more precise handling of the tenses: "Marius had been supposedly unhappy ..."
3rd paragraph: Gaetulian and Numidian"
. I first mistook Gaetulian for the name of a person. I had never heard of the
Gaetuli. I would suggest to inverse and write "Numidian and Gaetuliasn" as "Numidian" will be recognised as an adjective by the readers as they have already encountered the noun "Numidia" above.
Gaetulian and Mauretanian, changed to
Mauretanian and Gaetulian. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 08:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
5th paragraph": been immediately responsible
. - "Responsible" sound a bit too passive. I suggest "taken the risk and done the deed" if this can be supported by the cited source (Duncan), the relevant part of which I cannot access. The preview in Google Books is short and lacks page numbers.
1st paragraph, 1st sentence: their defeat of
. - Very misleading. First I thought the Cimbri had been defeated. I suggest to change to "their victory over". This is the first mention of the Cimbri in the text of the body. Some explanation about who they were might be needed. Perhaps bring it forward from the 1st sentence of the 2nd paragraph.
In 109 BC a migrating Germanic tribe called the Cimbri appeared in Gaul and routed the Roman army there under Marcus Junius Silanus. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 08:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph, 1st sentence: had crippled Roman prestige
- Can prestige be crippled? A person, an animal, a car or a machine can be crippled if a member or important part is missing; but prestige? I suggest "had led to loss of Roman prestige" but that is a bit long. Perhaps "had diminished Roman prestige" or "had damaged Roman prestige". You can find better.
This defeat reduced Roman prestige? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 08:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: Tigurini
. - The reader might be surprised to hear about the Tigurini here. How does their story link up with that of Marius?
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: march under the yoke
. - We have discussed this before (if you still need this).
1st paragraph, 4th sentence: Tolosa
. - It looks to me as if the capture of Tolosa and the treasure are not needed for Marius's story. It is treated in the article
Quintus Servilius Caepio (comsul 106 BC).
There, he captured of Tolosa (modern Toulouse). While Caepio was prorogued into the next year, the new consul for 105 BC, Gnaeus Mallius Maximus…? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 10:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
The next year, 106 BC, another consul, Quintus Servilius Caepio, marched to Gaul with a new army to salvage the situation. Caepio was prorogued into the next year and the new consul for 105 BC, Gnaeus Mallius Maximus, was also assigned to southern Gaul with another army.-- Cerebellum ( talk) 11:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph, 4th sentence: there he captured the town community of Tolosa ...
. - Looks unnecessarily complicated. I suggest to simplify to "He captured Tolosa ..." (if you still need this).
2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: The Cimbri and the Teutones (both migrating Germanic tribes) ...
. - This is the first mention of the Teutones in the text of the body. I suggest changing to "The Cimbri, now accompanied by the Teutones (another Germanic tribe), ..." (if this is well so and can be substantiated by the citations).
The Cimbri and another tribe called the Teutones appeared on the Rhône? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 10:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: Arausio
. - Mention this is modern Orange. The reader should be able to follow your narrative without having to look up wikilinks. I find it is importatnt for the reader to know where this Arausio was. The reader might know the modern names.
3rd paragraph, 21st sentence, citation: Evans 2017
. - There is no Evans 2017 in the source list.
1st paragraph, 4th & last sentence: or sortition
. - I suggest "or by sortion".
2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence: bBsing his army around a core ...
. - Sounds strange because normally you base something on something, not around something. I suggest "Building his army aroung a core ...".
2nd paragraph, last sentence: Aquae Sextiae
. - Mention this is modern Aix-en-Provence. The reader should be able to follow your narrative without having to look up wikilinks. I find it is importatnt for the reader to know where this Aquae Sextiae was. The reader might know the modern names.
5th paragraph. - What is the relevance of the slave revolt to Marius's story?
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: called for repeal of ...
. - I suggest: "called for the repeal of ..." (with the definite article).
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: Gracchus'
. - Grachus' -> Grachus's.
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: term of services
. - I think you do not mean "term of service" (the length of time of the military service) but rather "terms of service" (the conditions under which the recruits provided military service) or perhaps more precisely the "prerequisites that a recruit had to comply with" (which is not covered by the citation). Which one?. In fact I would suggest to write "Gracchus's recruitment requirements.".
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence, citation: Rich 1983
. - The footquote has a quotation and a sentence after the close of the quote. I suppose only the quotation is from Rich whereas the last sentence is a comment from a Wikipedia editor. If this is so, I feel that it would be better to transform this into an explanatory note (Efn) that include the citatio.
1st paragraph, 4th sentence: While enrollment ...
. - I find the sentence difficult to understand mainly because you replaced Rich's "since" with "because". In addition a semicolon instead of the comma before the conjunction would make it easier to read: "disapproval; since ...".
While enrollment of volunteers without property provoked disapproval, none had been enrolled against their will, so legal action could not be taken? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 12:02, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph, 5th sentence: ... unqualified volunteers.
. - I find it is not necessary to quote here. Rather paraphrase. The "unqualified" could be interpreted in more than one way. I suggest to clarify "... volunteers that did not comply with the property requirements."
Modern historians view this enrollment in near-sighted political terms: forcing men with property to serve would have made Marius unpopular, so he resorted to recruiting among the poor.-- Cerebellum ( talk) 12:02, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph, 1st sentence: returned from Hispania
. - The return from Spain seems to have been stated twice.
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: Ambrones
. - Wikilink. The article
Ambrones exists.
4th paragraph: the slave revolt
. - I still feel that the slave revolt should be omitted in section "As consul" and only "a slave revolt" should be mentioned here.
6th paragraph, terminal citation: Evans 1995, pp. 112
. - A single page, therefor pp. -> p.
2nd paragraph. - Very difficult to make sense of, but so is Evans's text on which most of it is based. This can perhaps be shortenend to the general ideas and objectives of Saturninus (more power to the people and less to the Senate) and inspiration for this might be found in the article Lucius Appuleius Saturninus and the sources cited there.
3rd paragraph, 1st sentence: Badian argues ...
. - Who is Badian? he is not wikilinked and does not appear as an author in the source list.
3rd paragraph, last sentence: lex Licinia Mucia
. - This is not understandable unless the reader reads about the law following the wikilink.
who was now being prosecuted under a new citizenship law.
1st paragraph, last sentence: Italian states then revolted
. - I suggest "Italian states revolted" (without the "then").
1st paragraph, last sentence: ally, socii
. - Ally is singular but socii is plural, thus either "ally, socius" or "allies, socii".
2nd paragraph, 4th sentence: With Marius in command of their camp ...
. - I suggest "With Marius in control of their camp ...".
2nd paragraph, last sentence: Quintus Poppaedius Silo himself.
. - This is the first mention of Q. Poppaedius Silo. He is also mentioned further down and explained as "one of their generals". That should rather be explained here.
5th paragraph, 1st sentence: Marius's experience in the conflict ...
. - The word "experience" might be interpreted in more than one way. I suggest "Marius's efforts in this conflict ..." (if this is what you meant).
5th paragraph, 1st sentence: ... brought him few honors.
. - Since British English was chosen, it should read "honours", not "honors".
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: In response, King Mithridates of Pontus responded ...
. - I suggest "In response King Mithridates of Pontus invaded both kingdoms as well as the Roman holdings ...".
2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: After news of Mithridates's atrocities ...
. - We have not heard of Mithridates's atrocities yet. Something missing?
3rd paragraph, 5th sentence: After killing Marius's legate ...
. - We hear of two legates: "legates" or "one of Marius's legates"?
3rd paragraph, last sentence: who were promptly murdered by Sulla's troops.
. - The relative pronoun "who" seems to refer to the legions.
5th paragraph, 2nd sentence: ... rather than an actual change in policy.
. - Perhaps "avoiding an actual change in policy"?
1st paragraph, 1st sentence after the block quote, citation: Evans 1995, p. 169
. - The statement "modern historians ..." needs a quote that says "modern historians" I do not find such a passage on page 169 (WP:RS/AC).
1st paragraph, 1st sentence: In the traditional narratives ...
. - It might not be clear to all readers which are the "traditional narratives". The term has not been used before. I suppose it is Sallust and Plutarch?
1st paragraph, last sentence, quotation: "the composition of the post-Marian armies ..."
. - It is not clear from where the quote is taken as two inline citations follow. MOS:QUOTE says "The reader must be able to determine the source of any quotation, at the very least via a footnote." It also does not really seem necessary to give a quotation. Paraphrasing what the cited authors say would probably work just as well.
2nd paragraph, 1st sentence, quotation: "The property qualification for army service ..."
. - somewhat similar as above. The MOS says "The source must be named in article text if the quotation is an opinion."
3rd paragraph, last sentence, quotation: "increasingly irksome chore ..."
. - somewhat similar as above. The MOS says "The source must be named in article text if the quotation is an opinion."
1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: lex Sempronia
. - What has this lex Sempronia to do with Marius? It was passed during his early career but is not mentioned in the discussion of that time in his life.
2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence, note: "See both Sulla and Marius's purges ..."
. - I suppose it should be "Sulla's"
The timeline is cut off at the right end.
I should probably do a 2nd traverse. However, there are many remarks waiting for replies and possibly actions. The nominators' latest reply is by ifly6 in the remarks made on section "Run for the consulship", dating from 11 February, eight days ago.
The Step 4 of the GA reviewers' instructions says (Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions):
"You are expected to respond to the reviewer's suggestions to improve the article to GA quality in a timely manner (if you absolutely cannot, make sure another editor can). Other editors are also welcome to comment and work on the article, but the final decision on listing will be with the first reviewer. Review timeframes vary from one nomination to the next, but a responsive nominator and reviewer can complete a review in about seven days. A reviewer may put the review "on hold" for about seven days to allow you time to fix any issues that may arise (reviewers can shorten/extend the time limit if they wish). If a review stalls or there is disagreement over interpretation of the good article criteria, you may want to consider allowing the review to fail, then renominating the article (to get a different reviewer). Or, you may try asking the nominator to ask for a second opinion. Otherwise, you can ask for assistance at the GA nominations talk page."
I know I lack experience and your article probably merits a better reviewer, but if I do not review, how should I gain the experience? My mentor told me to do 12 reviews after my nomination Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty passed A-Class. If you wish so, I could fail Gaius Marius and you can then nominate the article again and get another review with a better reviewer. However, I am also ready to go on if you simply need a bit more time.
With thanks and best reagards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 18:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
@ Johannes Schade: @ Ifly6: I think I have responded to everything, please take a look and let me know where I have erred. Johannes, for what it's worth I think you are doing an excellent job of reviewing, more thorough than most. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 14:57, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
@ Johannes Schade: Thank you so much! Looking forward to your feedback. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 14:59, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
I note that some {{citation needed}} tags were added on 6 February, I'll add the citations as soon as I can. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 17:44, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Re whether Sulla was took the risk and done the deed, to borrow that terminology, it wasn't him alone. He was directly responsible for the negotiations with Bocchus; Marius had approved the negotiations and encouraged them. As with most group projects, everyone had a different view of how much everyone else did. Ifly6 ( talk) 21:08, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Some general remarks
The articles length has diminished from 51 kB (8395 words) to 50 kB (8320 words), which is an improvement as WP:SIZERULE says ">50 k: May need to be divided". So keep in mind that the article should not be made longer.
More to come Johannes Schade ( talk) 21:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
"... Assembly elected Marius consul.". - I suggest to link assemply to Centuriate Assembly, as this was the body that elected the consuls.
"... and Marius fought in the war but his military success was limited. ". - I suggest: "... in which Marius fought with limited success."
"... in 86 BC. His life ...". - Two successive spaces. Please make a search for obnoxious consecutive spaces and eliminate them.
"Cereatae". - I suggest to link to Casamari Abbey and perhaps explain "modern Casamari" as you find suitable.
"Plutarch 1920, p. 469". - This is the first of several Plutarch citations. The GA criteria are very lenient on how citations are done. However, I find it weird that you use sometimes
|p=
and sometimes |loc=
for citations from the same source. We have discussed this before and I understand that the numbers given with |loc=
are the canonical paragraph and sentence numbers. However, the general Wikipedia reader will not understand. I propose to always give the page numbers and give a one-click llink to the source in the Sfn so that the classicist can jump directly to the page where he will be able to see the canonical paragraph numbers so that he can find the corresponding page in a paper book of his choice. Like this: "{{Sfn|Plutarch|1920|p=[https://archive.org/details/L101PlutarchParallelLivesIXDemetriusAntonyPyrrhusGaiusMarius/page/n489/ 469]}}". If you agree, please go through your Plutarch 1916 and 1920 citations, replace the |loc=
with |p=
or |pp=
and provide one-click links directly to the cited page. Furthermore, regarding the long citation in the source list, note that the |url=
given there, which points to the beginning of the chapter, should stop at the page, excluding display instructions ("mode/2up"). Like this: "
https://archive.org/details/L101PlutarchParallelLivesIXDemetriusAntonyPyrrhusGaiusMarius/page/n485/" (not like "
https://archive.org/details/L101PlutarchParallelLivesIXDemetriusAntonyPyrrhusGaiusMarius/page/n485/mode/2up"). Perhaps go through all your |url=
parameters and remove the needless tails. As online books are static, you can omit the |access-date=
parameter."The military tribunate shows ...". - I suggest to delete the sentence. I do not see its interest. His military tribunship has been discussed above.
"Sallust 1921, 48–55". - This is the first citation from Sallust's Jugurthine War. We have already discussed this. I still feel Sallust should be treated like Plutarch and be taken from a online book (at Internet Archive), not a website (such as https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Sallust/Bellum_Jugurthinum/2*.html in this case), and pages should be cited, not canonical paragraphs and sentence numbers. The website might not be acceptable as a reliable source. It seems to be self-published by a guy called Bill Thayer.
"... have the Assembly override the Senate's decision ...". - I suggest to link "assembly" to whatever type of Roman assembly this was.
More to come, Johannes Schade ( talk) 13:36, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
Beard, Mary 2015 .... - This citation is using <ref></ref>. I suggest to change it to Sfn as the majority of the citations use that style. There are a couple of others that need the same conversion. You might want to do that in the same go. Mary Beard's book is at https://archive.org/details/spqrhistoryofanc0000bear/.
He arrived comparatively late .... - I suggest "Marius arrived comparatively late ...". Grammatically the "He" refers to Jugurtha, which is not what you mean.
... Cirta.. - I suggest explaining that Cirta is modern Constantine in Algeria.
More to come, Johannes Schade ( talk) 16:40, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
@ Johannes Schade: Just want to check in with you, what else do we need to do on this article? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 10:42, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
... proved a highly competent. - I think "proved a competent" is good enough.
... , and for a time. - A comma is needed before "and" as it joins two independent clauses.
"friend and ally of the Roman people". - Quotations in the main body need be attributed (MOS:QUOTATIONS). I suggest to add a citation.
"Plutarch 1920, 12.1–4". - This citation refers to the Life of Marius in Plutarch's Parallel Lives, but it leaves to the reader to find the page. Quite obviously, the Life of Marius is not the only one that comprises a 12th paragraph. The given canonical location is therefore not easy to find. The description of the book in the source list should give the page on which the Life of Marius' starts. I also believe the {{ Sfn}} should give a page number (perhaps a directly clickable one) rather than a canonical number. The reader, once he has found the page will discover what the canonical paragraph number is, which he might use to find the same location in a different edition.
"... deed and had a signet ring made ...". - I know I have already made you change this sentence once, but I was not entirely successful. I now find it has become too long. I suggest to cut it in two by inserting a full stop before the "and", thus: "... deed. He had a signet ring made ..."; but think about the entre passage, perhaps you can find better.
More to comme, Johannes Schade ( talk) 15:16, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
Mistakes to avoid: Requiring page numbers where these are not essential ... Requiring consistently formatted, complete bibliographic citations. If you are able to figure out what the source is, that's a good enough citation for GA. I also think that citation of Plutarch should be reverted to Penelope, which is more readily searchable (Command-F, type in the number). They're even the same books. EDIT. I altered to use Tufts Perseus.
"... deed and had a signet ring made ..."is 22 words long and scores a Flesch-Kincaid grade 10. It isn't at all long or complex. Regardless, I rewrote the description to more clearly describe a conflict over who got credit rather than the specific things they did in chronological order. Ifly6 ( talk) 04:05, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
"Evans 1995, p. 99". - The relevant passage ("He was immediately assigned Gaul as his proconsular command ...") starts on p.98: perhaps "pp. 98–99".
"Atkinson 1995, p. 106". - I had difficulties to find where the claims made in the last sentence of the 3rd paragraph are supported on page 106 of Atkinson 1995. It might be helpful to ad "Note 2" and extend the page to the range "pp. 106–107".
'spend a fruitless year employed with garrison duty'. - Quotation marks are normally double and not single in Wikipedia (MOS:QUOTEMARKS).
"Sherwin-White 1956, p. 5". - The corresponding entry in the list of sources says page 5, like in the Sfn, however the article occupies pages 1–9.
More to come, Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:40, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
In the case of a marginally non-compliant nomination, if the problems are easy to resolve, you may be bold and fix them yourself.I'd appreciate it if you have the fixes in hand (eg "pages 1–9"). Ifly6 ( talk) 04:18, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
"Plutarch 1920, 30.4". - This sentence reads "At the end of his consulship, Plutarch states that Marius's reputation was in tatters." The citation mark is numbered 131 at present. When I click from the citation mark through to the source, I land on a website " http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0007.tlg031.perseus-eng1", which indeed shows the beginning of the "Life of Marius" of Plutarch's "Parallel Lifes" as you said it would. However, how do I get to "30.4"? I thought 30 was a paragraph, but the website offers links to chapters and sections, so I assume 30 is a chapter and 4 a section, but when I go to chapter 30, section 4, I get a text about the murder of Saturninus, whereas I expected a passage that supports that Marius's reputation was in tatters. In 31.2 there is a passage "And now, thinking that his influence and reputation were gradually fading away because of his inactivity and quietude", which might be what you were trying to cite. I might of course be entirely wrong. Do you think the general English Wikipedia reader (from Nigeria for example) will know his way through this? I had never heard of Sallust and Plutarch and canonical references before starting this review. Otherwise, having been educated about these by you, I understand that the canonical method of citing should be taken into account as the classicist like you is perhaps more prone to want to look up the references than the Nigerian. I wonder whether there is not a way that would give both, the page and the canonical reference, in the {{ Sfn}}. Would you agree with {{Sfn|Plutarch|1920|p=[https://archive.org/details/L101PlutarchParallelLivesIXDemetriusAntonyPyrrhusGaiusMarius/page/n569/ 549|loc=40.3}}?
More to come, Johannes Schade ( talk) 15:48, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Plut. Mar. 30.4, yielding:
[4] Marius did all he could to save the men, but it was of no avail, and when they came down into the forum they were put to death. This affair made Marius obnoxious alike to the nobles and to the people, and when the time for electing censors came he did not present himself as a candidate, although everyone expected that he would, but allowed other and inferior men to be elected, for fear that he would be defeated. However, he tried to put a good face upon his conduct by saying that he was unwilling to incur the hatred of many citizens by a severe examination into their lives and manners.
loc
at the same time. It generates a nonsense citation like Blah 1990, p. 123, 1.2.3which is not helpful. I have no idea whether Nigerians are looking into Plutarch or not. I do know that if they are, they won't necessarily be paging through a c. 1920 edition of Parallel Lives. Ifly6 ( talk) 16:28, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
"Cicero, De oratore 2.194–196". - The GA criteria prescribe "it contains a list of all references (sources of information)". Cicero's works cited in the article are omitted in the list of sources. You might want to add them, but the GA criteria do not require it ("consistent formatting or including every element of the bibliographic material is not required").
"... proposed a greater division of state lands, ...". - I wonder what the "greater division" means and would welcome a clarification. I suspect the proposal did not only subdivide stateland in smaller parcels but also distribute or allot these parcels to landless people. Unluckily I cannot preview Duncan 2017 p 216.
"... Lesbos ...". - Link Lesbos (the Greek island).
"... beneficence of ability ...". - Do you mean "beneficence or ability"?
"Willingness". - Perhaps rather |readiness"?\
I think a timeline is a good idea, but there are Wikipedians going around that delete them as "duplicative".
The realistic timewise spacing along the line results in empty space during calm times on one hand and insufficient space on the other hand when things get busy. There might be other events less directly related to Marius that could be added for context, e.g. the reforms of the Gracchi, the Punic wars while he was a child. An ordinary tabular format would probably be more efficient . Se e.g. the timetable (collapsed) in James Butler, 1st Duke of Ormond. These are of course just comments that you can happily ignore.
So far. I will pause and think about whether there is anything outstanding. Best regards and thanks, Johannes Schade ( talk) 21:36, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Dear User:Ifly6 I think all concerns that are relevant according to the GA criteria have been resolved. Congratulations and many thanks for your patient explanations and replies. I learned a lot from you. Best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 09:17, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Johannes Schade ( talk · contribs) 09:41, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Welcome
Ave
User:Cerebellum and
User:Ifly6: I will be your reviewer for this, the second GA nomination of the article
Gaius Marius. I am an apprentice-reviewer much less experienced than either of the nominators (Ifly6 has only 1742 edits; but definitively is a subject-expert). Please tell me when I go wrong. I see you nominated the article on 9 January 2022. I see it is rated "B" at present. The prose is 51 kB (8395 words), WP:SIZERULE says ">50 k: May need to be divided". I applied the Rater script the article, which calls ORES which rated your article "B or higher" with a confidence of 92.7%. This sounds all very positive. I start reading now. Best regards,
Johannes Schade (
talk)
09:41, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
The 6 GA criteria (WP:GA?) 1. Well written a) Clear, concise, understandable, grammatical, and correctly spelled. b) MOS:LEADLENGTH, MOS:LAYOUT, MOS:WTW, WP:WAF, & MOS:LIST 2. Verifiable and no original research a) Notes, citations, & references MOS:NOTES b) Inline citations c} WP:OR d) Copyright violations and plagiarisms 3. Broad coverage a) Main aspects b) Focused 4. Neutral 5. Stable 6. Illustrated a) Copyright b) Relevant and captions
I start a first traverse.
|Image=
- The image is problematic because of the doubts about the identity of its sitter, why did you avoid using the photo of the Chiaramonti Marius (Musei Vaticani) that appears further down? If you keep the present image, it might be necessary to provide a citation for the claim that it might represent Scipio Asiaticus.Etcheto, Henri (2012)and footquote (WP:FOOTQUOTE), but why do you use <ref></ref> instead of
Sfn? Let us sort this out before going further. Johannes Schade ( talk) 16:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Sfn. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 17:21, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
|Alt=
- White bust. This sculpture is somewhere between a bust and a head as it shows very little of the shoulders. Perhaps the Alt text should give more detail.
Alternative text should be short, such as "A basketball player" or "Tony Blair shakes hands with George W. Bush".How about
Scuplture of a man's head and a small part of his shoulders? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 12:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Latin town of Arpinum. - The article Arpino says "Connected with the Pelasgi, the Volsci and Samnite people".
southern Latium. - I would call it "south-east Latium".
|url=
and {Para|oclc}} and content yourself with |isbn=
. I feel a |url=
should never point to WorldCat and if |isbn=
is given |oclc=
should be omitted. I would guess: ifly6=Richard John Evans.Hildinger 2002, p. 59. - This book is in Internet Archive at https://archive.org/details/swordsagainstsen0000hild/. It is incredible what IA all has! Please change this source from Google Books to IA. I suggested above to remove OCLC when ISBN is available, but if you want to give both, please do so. There is no rule against this in Wikipedia. Since you are again generously giving a footquote, may I ask you : why do you write "ps=. ", resulting in ". " in the footquote and not ": ", resulting in ": "? You probably have thought about this. I think it is not the first time I see it done like this. I also like to give my readers footquotes but I always write "ps=: " (see Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty) to see how I do it. With many thanks and best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 16:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Evans, Richard (2008). - Why do you implement your citations mostly with {{ Sfn}} but then sometimes also with <ref></ref> instead. Both are accepted for GA purposes but I think they should not be mixed haphazardly. Or is there some order and method in this? (I personally by far prefer {{ Sfn}}).
Wikipedia's guidelines generally prohibit editors from changing from one acceptable form of inline citations to another without consensus, especially for reasons of personal preference or to make one article match the style in another article.. See Template:Citation style. Also, thanks, Cerebellum for doing the grunt work of normalising the citations. Ifly6 ( talk) 19:46, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
praetor. - I suggest replacing "praetor" with "a praetor" in "He was elected as praetor for 102&BC" as there were more than one praetor in office at the same time, which the reader might not know.
Conti, Flavio (2003). - Another citation implemented with <ref></ref>.
While he was serving. - "While serving" might be sufficient." Johannes Schade ( talk) 16:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
This connection may be. - I suggest simply: "this may be".
March under the yoke. - would not "pass under the yoke" be a better translation for sub iugum mittere? See the illustration in the article Tigurini. The yoke remains in place, the Roman soldiers pass through bending deeply under the yoke.
More to come, best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 21:56, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Caecilii Metelli. - Are the "Caecilii Metelli" a specific branch of the Metelli? Why "Caecilii"?
Jugurthine War. - We are in a section "Subordinate of Metellus". There is a section "Run for the Consulship" and then a section "Jugurthine War" further dow. It seems we are in plain Jugurthine War long before the start of the corresponding section. This is confusing.
Metellus'. - Possessive singular, not plural: Metellus'-> Metellus's; Marius'-> Marius's. (see e.g. William Strunk, The Elements of Style).
Xius's. That said, in classics books, you will not find this commonly followed (I am sure there are those who do follow it). I changed merely to avoid a meaningless argument, not because "we do agree after all". Possessives are almost always without trailing s. Eg:
Marius', which while acceptable in classical scholarship, is also outside of BrE conventions). I reverted my comment when I re-read your comment and realised what it actually meant. Ifly6 ( talk) 01:11, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Sallust 1921, 48–55. - This cites Sallust's Jugurthine War from a website. I do not know what the loc=48–55 means. The cited website shows subdivisions ("paragraphs") 1–35. I therefore do not know which part of the text you are trying to cite. Like it already was the case with Plutarch above, it would be much better to cite Sallust from an online book than from a website. See https://archive.org/details/L116LacusCurtiusSallustWarWithCatilineWarWithJugurtha/page/n155/
|at=1.2.3
rather than directly to the page numbers, because those page numbers are basically useless given the plethora of different reprints, editions, etc. Basically all 1850+ editions are indexed both on pages and on the paragraph numbers.
Ifly6 (
talk)
20:32, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph: campaign 20 years in the future
. - How do you come to precisely 20 years?
2nd paragraph: Marius was supposedly unhappy
. - I suggest a more precise handling of the tenses: "Marius had been supposedly unhappy ..."
3rd paragraph: Gaetulian and Numidian"
. I first mistook Gaetulian for the name of a person. I had never heard of the
Gaetuli. I would suggest to inverse and write "Numidian and Gaetuliasn" as "Numidian" will be recognised as an adjective by the readers as they have already encountered the noun "Numidia" above.
Gaetulian and Mauretanian, changed to
Mauretanian and Gaetulian. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 08:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
5th paragraph": been immediately responsible
. - "Responsible" sound a bit too passive. I suggest "taken the risk and done the deed" if this can be supported by the cited source (Duncan), the relevant part of which I cannot access. The preview in Google Books is short and lacks page numbers.
1st paragraph, 1st sentence: their defeat of
. - Very misleading. First I thought the Cimbri had been defeated. I suggest to change to "their victory over". This is the first mention of the Cimbri in the text of the body. Some explanation about who they were might be needed. Perhaps bring it forward from the 1st sentence of the 2nd paragraph.
In 109 BC a migrating Germanic tribe called the Cimbri appeared in Gaul and routed the Roman army there under Marcus Junius Silanus. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 08:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph, 1st sentence: had crippled Roman prestige
- Can prestige be crippled? A person, an animal, a car or a machine can be crippled if a member or important part is missing; but prestige? I suggest "had led to loss of Roman prestige" but that is a bit long. Perhaps "had diminished Roman prestige" or "had damaged Roman prestige". You can find better.
This defeat reduced Roman prestige? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 08:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: Tigurini
. - The reader might be surprised to hear about the Tigurini here. How does their story link up with that of Marius?
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: march under the yoke
. - We have discussed this before (if you still need this).
1st paragraph, 4th sentence: Tolosa
. - It looks to me as if the capture of Tolosa and the treasure are not needed for Marius's story. It is treated in the article
Quintus Servilius Caepio (comsul 106 BC).
There, he captured of Tolosa (modern Toulouse). While Caepio was prorogued into the next year, the new consul for 105 BC, Gnaeus Mallius Maximus…? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 10:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
The next year, 106 BC, another consul, Quintus Servilius Caepio, marched to Gaul with a new army to salvage the situation. Caepio was prorogued into the next year and the new consul for 105 BC, Gnaeus Mallius Maximus, was also assigned to southern Gaul with another army.-- Cerebellum ( talk) 11:40, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph, 4th sentence: there he captured the town community of Tolosa ...
. - Looks unnecessarily complicated. I suggest to simplify to "He captured Tolosa ..." (if you still need this).
2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: The Cimbri and the Teutones (both migrating Germanic tribes) ...
. - This is the first mention of the Teutones in the text of the body. I suggest changing to "The Cimbri, now accompanied by the Teutones (another Germanic tribe), ..." (if this is well so and can be substantiated by the citations).
The Cimbri and another tribe called the Teutones appeared on the Rhône? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 10:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: Arausio
. - Mention this is modern Orange. The reader should be able to follow your narrative without having to look up wikilinks. I find it is importatnt for the reader to know where this Arausio was. The reader might know the modern names.
3rd paragraph, 21st sentence, citation: Evans 2017
. - There is no Evans 2017 in the source list.
1st paragraph, 4th & last sentence: or sortition
. - I suggest "or by sortion".
2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence: bBsing his army around a core ...
. - Sounds strange because normally you base something on something, not around something. I suggest "Building his army aroung a core ...".
2nd paragraph, last sentence: Aquae Sextiae
. - Mention this is modern Aix-en-Provence. The reader should be able to follow your narrative without having to look up wikilinks. I find it is importatnt for the reader to know where this Aquae Sextiae was. The reader might know the modern names.
5th paragraph. - What is the relevance of the slave revolt to Marius's story?
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: called for repeal of ...
. - I suggest: "called for the repeal of ..." (with the definite article).
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: Gracchus'
. - Grachus' -> Grachus's.
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: term of services
. - I think you do not mean "term of service" (the length of time of the military service) but rather "terms of service" (the conditions under which the recruits provided military service) or perhaps more precisely the "prerequisites that a recruit had to comply with" (which is not covered by the citation). Which one?. In fact I would suggest to write "Gracchus's recruitment requirements.".
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence, citation: Rich 1983
. - The footquote has a quotation and a sentence after the close of the quote. I suppose only the quotation is from Rich whereas the last sentence is a comment from a Wikipedia editor. If this is so, I feel that it would be better to transform this into an explanatory note (Efn) that include the citatio.
1st paragraph, 4th sentence: While enrollment ...
. - I find the sentence difficult to understand mainly because you replaced Rich's "since" with "because". In addition a semicolon instead of the comma before the conjunction would make it easier to read: "disapproval; since ...".
While enrollment of volunteers without property provoked disapproval, none had been enrolled against their will, so legal action could not be taken? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 12:02, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph, 5th sentence: ... unqualified volunteers.
. - I find it is not necessary to quote here. Rather paraphrase. The "unqualified" could be interpreted in more than one way. I suggest to clarify "... volunteers that did not comply with the property requirements."
Modern historians view this enrollment in near-sighted political terms: forcing men with property to serve would have made Marius unpopular, so he resorted to recruiting among the poor.-- Cerebellum ( talk) 12:02, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
1st paragraph, 1st sentence: returned from Hispania
. - The return from Spain seems to have been stated twice.
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: Ambrones
. - Wikilink. The article
Ambrones exists.
4th paragraph: the slave revolt
. - I still feel that the slave revolt should be omitted in section "As consul" and only "a slave revolt" should be mentioned here.
6th paragraph, terminal citation: Evans 1995, pp. 112
. - A single page, therefor pp. -> p.
2nd paragraph. - Very difficult to make sense of, but so is Evans's text on which most of it is based. This can perhaps be shortenend to the general ideas and objectives of Saturninus (more power to the people and less to the Senate) and inspiration for this might be found in the article Lucius Appuleius Saturninus and the sources cited there.
3rd paragraph, 1st sentence: Badian argues ...
. - Who is Badian? he is not wikilinked and does not appear as an author in the source list.
3rd paragraph, last sentence: lex Licinia Mucia
. - This is not understandable unless the reader reads about the law following the wikilink.
who was now being prosecuted under a new citizenship law.
1st paragraph, last sentence: Italian states then revolted
. - I suggest "Italian states revolted" (without the "then").
1st paragraph, last sentence: ally, socii
. - Ally is singular but socii is plural, thus either "ally, socius" or "allies, socii".
2nd paragraph, 4th sentence: With Marius in command of their camp ...
. - I suggest "With Marius in control of their camp ...".
2nd paragraph, last sentence: Quintus Poppaedius Silo himself.
. - This is the first mention of Q. Poppaedius Silo. He is also mentioned further down and explained as "one of their generals". That should rather be explained here.
5th paragraph, 1st sentence: Marius's experience in the conflict ...
. - The word "experience" might be interpreted in more than one way. I suggest "Marius's efforts in this conflict ..." (if this is what you meant).
5th paragraph, 1st sentence: ... brought him few honors.
. - Since British English was chosen, it should read "honours", not "honors".
1st paragraph, 2nd sentence: In response, King Mithridates of Pontus responded ...
. - I suggest "In response King Mithridates of Pontus invaded both kingdoms as well as the Roman holdings ...".
2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: After news of Mithridates's atrocities ...
. - We have not heard of Mithridates's atrocities yet. Something missing?
3rd paragraph, 5th sentence: After killing Marius's legate ...
. - We hear of two legates: "legates" or "one of Marius's legates"?
3rd paragraph, last sentence: who were promptly murdered by Sulla's troops.
. - The relative pronoun "who" seems to refer to the legions.
5th paragraph, 2nd sentence: ... rather than an actual change in policy.
. - Perhaps "avoiding an actual change in policy"?
1st paragraph, 1st sentence after the block quote, citation: Evans 1995, p. 169
. - The statement "modern historians ..." needs a quote that says "modern historians" I do not find such a passage on page 169 (WP:RS/AC).
1st paragraph, 1st sentence: In the traditional narratives ...
. - It might not be clear to all readers which are the "traditional narratives". The term has not been used before. I suppose it is Sallust and Plutarch?
1st paragraph, last sentence, quotation: "the composition of the post-Marian armies ..."
. - It is not clear from where the quote is taken as two inline citations follow. MOS:QUOTE says "The reader must be able to determine the source of any quotation, at the very least via a footnote." It also does not really seem necessary to give a quotation. Paraphrasing what the cited authors say would probably work just as well.
2nd paragraph, 1st sentence, quotation: "The property qualification for army service ..."
. - somewhat similar as above. The MOS says "The source must be named in article text if the quotation is an opinion."
3rd paragraph, last sentence, quotation: "increasingly irksome chore ..."
. - somewhat similar as above. The MOS says "The source must be named in article text if the quotation is an opinion."
1st paragraph, 3rd sentence: lex Sempronia
. - What has this lex Sempronia to do with Marius? It was passed during his early career but is not mentioned in the discussion of that time in his life.
2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence, note: "See both Sulla and Marius's purges ..."
. - I suppose it should be "Sulla's"
The timeline is cut off at the right end.
I should probably do a 2nd traverse. However, there are many remarks waiting for replies and possibly actions. The nominators' latest reply is by ifly6 in the remarks made on section "Run for the consulship", dating from 11 February, eight days ago.
The Step 4 of the GA reviewers' instructions says (Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions):
"You are expected to respond to the reviewer's suggestions to improve the article to GA quality in a timely manner (if you absolutely cannot, make sure another editor can). Other editors are also welcome to comment and work on the article, but the final decision on listing will be with the first reviewer. Review timeframes vary from one nomination to the next, but a responsive nominator and reviewer can complete a review in about seven days. A reviewer may put the review "on hold" for about seven days to allow you time to fix any issues that may arise (reviewers can shorten/extend the time limit if they wish). If a review stalls or there is disagreement over interpretation of the good article criteria, you may want to consider allowing the review to fail, then renominating the article (to get a different reviewer). Or, you may try asking the nominator to ask for a second opinion. Otherwise, you can ask for assistance at the GA nominations talk page."
I know I lack experience and your article probably merits a better reviewer, but if I do not review, how should I gain the experience? My mentor told me to do 12 reviews after my nomination Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty passed A-Class. If you wish so, I could fail Gaius Marius and you can then nominate the article again and get another review with a better reviewer. However, I am also ready to go on if you simply need a bit more time.
With thanks and best reagards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 18:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
@ Johannes Schade: @ Ifly6: I think I have responded to everything, please take a look and let me know where I have erred. Johannes, for what it's worth I think you are doing an excellent job of reviewing, more thorough than most. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 14:57, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
@ Johannes Schade: Thank you so much! Looking forward to your feedback. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 14:59, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
I note that some {{citation needed}} tags were added on 6 February, I'll add the citations as soon as I can. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 17:44, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Re whether Sulla was took the risk and done the deed, to borrow that terminology, it wasn't him alone. He was directly responsible for the negotiations with Bocchus; Marius had approved the negotiations and encouraged them. As with most group projects, everyone had a different view of how much everyone else did. Ifly6 ( talk) 21:08, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Some general remarks
The articles length has diminished from 51 kB (8395 words) to 50 kB (8320 words), which is an improvement as WP:SIZERULE says ">50 k: May need to be divided". So keep in mind that the article should not be made longer.
More to come Johannes Schade ( talk) 21:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
"... Assembly elected Marius consul.". - I suggest to link assemply to Centuriate Assembly, as this was the body that elected the consuls.
"... and Marius fought in the war but his military success was limited. ". - I suggest: "... in which Marius fought with limited success."
"... in 86 BC. His life ...". - Two successive spaces. Please make a search for obnoxious consecutive spaces and eliminate them.
"Cereatae". - I suggest to link to Casamari Abbey and perhaps explain "modern Casamari" as you find suitable.
"Plutarch 1920, p. 469". - This is the first of several Plutarch citations. The GA criteria are very lenient on how citations are done. However, I find it weird that you use sometimes
|p=
and sometimes |loc=
for citations from the same source. We have discussed this before and I understand that the numbers given with |loc=
are the canonical paragraph and sentence numbers. However, the general Wikipedia reader will not understand. I propose to always give the page numbers and give a one-click llink to the source in the Sfn so that the classicist can jump directly to the page where he will be able to see the canonical paragraph numbers so that he can find the corresponding page in a paper book of his choice. Like this: "{{Sfn|Plutarch|1920|p=[https://archive.org/details/L101PlutarchParallelLivesIXDemetriusAntonyPyrrhusGaiusMarius/page/n489/ 469]}}". If you agree, please go through your Plutarch 1916 and 1920 citations, replace the |loc=
with |p=
or |pp=
and provide one-click links directly to the cited page. Furthermore, regarding the long citation in the source list, note that the |url=
given there, which points to the beginning of the chapter, should stop at the page, excluding display instructions ("mode/2up"). Like this: "
https://archive.org/details/L101PlutarchParallelLivesIXDemetriusAntonyPyrrhusGaiusMarius/page/n485/" (not like "
https://archive.org/details/L101PlutarchParallelLivesIXDemetriusAntonyPyrrhusGaiusMarius/page/n485/mode/2up"). Perhaps go through all your |url=
parameters and remove the needless tails. As online books are static, you can omit the |access-date=
parameter."The military tribunate shows ...". - I suggest to delete the sentence. I do not see its interest. His military tribunship has been discussed above.
"Sallust 1921, 48–55". - This is the first citation from Sallust's Jugurthine War. We have already discussed this. I still feel Sallust should be treated like Plutarch and be taken from a online book (at Internet Archive), not a website (such as https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Sallust/Bellum_Jugurthinum/2*.html in this case), and pages should be cited, not canonical paragraphs and sentence numbers. The website might not be acceptable as a reliable source. It seems to be self-published by a guy called Bill Thayer.
"... have the Assembly override the Senate's decision ...". - I suggest to link "assembly" to whatever type of Roman assembly this was.
More to come, Johannes Schade ( talk) 13:36, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
Beard, Mary 2015 .... - This citation is using <ref></ref>. I suggest to change it to Sfn as the majority of the citations use that style. There are a couple of others that need the same conversion. You might want to do that in the same go. Mary Beard's book is at https://archive.org/details/spqrhistoryofanc0000bear/.
He arrived comparatively late .... - I suggest "Marius arrived comparatively late ...". Grammatically the "He" refers to Jugurtha, which is not what you mean.
... Cirta.. - I suggest explaining that Cirta is modern Constantine in Algeria.
More to come, Johannes Schade ( talk) 16:40, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
@ Johannes Schade: Just want to check in with you, what else do we need to do on this article? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 10:42, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
... proved a highly competent. - I think "proved a competent" is good enough.
... , and for a time. - A comma is needed before "and" as it joins two independent clauses.
"friend and ally of the Roman people". - Quotations in the main body need be attributed (MOS:QUOTATIONS). I suggest to add a citation.
"Plutarch 1920, 12.1–4". - This citation refers to the Life of Marius in Plutarch's Parallel Lives, but it leaves to the reader to find the page. Quite obviously, the Life of Marius is not the only one that comprises a 12th paragraph. The given canonical location is therefore not easy to find. The description of the book in the source list should give the page on which the Life of Marius' starts. I also believe the {{ Sfn}} should give a page number (perhaps a directly clickable one) rather than a canonical number. The reader, once he has found the page will discover what the canonical paragraph number is, which he might use to find the same location in a different edition.
"... deed and had a signet ring made ...". - I know I have already made you change this sentence once, but I was not entirely successful. I now find it has become too long. I suggest to cut it in two by inserting a full stop before the "and", thus: "... deed. He had a signet ring made ..."; but think about the entre passage, perhaps you can find better.
More to comme, Johannes Schade ( talk) 15:16, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
Mistakes to avoid: Requiring page numbers where these are not essential ... Requiring consistently formatted, complete bibliographic citations. If you are able to figure out what the source is, that's a good enough citation for GA. I also think that citation of Plutarch should be reverted to Penelope, which is more readily searchable (Command-F, type in the number). They're even the same books. EDIT. I altered to use Tufts Perseus.
"... deed and had a signet ring made ..."is 22 words long and scores a Flesch-Kincaid grade 10. It isn't at all long or complex. Regardless, I rewrote the description to more clearly describe a conflict over who got credit rather than the specific things they did in chronological order. Ifly6 ( talk) 04:05, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
"Evans 1995, p. 99". - The relevant passage ("He was immediately assigned Gaul as his proconsular command ...") starts on p.98: perhaps "pp. 98–99".
"Atkinson 1995, p. 106". - I had difficulties to find where the claims made in the last sentence of the 3rd paragraph are supported on page 106 of Atkinson 1995. It might be helpful to ad "Note 2" and extend the page to the range "pp. 106–107".
'spend a fruitless year employed with garrison duty'. - Quotation marks are normally double and not single in Wikipedia (MOS:QUOTEMARKS).
"Sherwin-White 1956, p. 5". - The corresponding entry in the list of sources says page 5, like in the Sfn, however the article occupies pages 1–9.
More to come, Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:40, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
In the case of a marginally non-compliant nomination, if the problems are easy to resolve, you may be bold and fix them yourself.I'd appreciate it if you have the fixes in hand (eg "pages 1–9"). Ifly6 ( talk) 04:18, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
"Plutarch 1920, 30.4". - This sentence reads "At the end of his consulship, Plutarch states that Marius's reputation was in tatters." The citation mark is numbered 131 at present. When I click from the citation mark through to the source, I land on a website " http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0007.tlg031.perseus-eng1", which indeed shows the beginning of the "Life of Marius" of Plutarch's "Parallel Lifes" as you said it would. However, how do I get to "30.4"? I thought 30 was a paragraph, but the website offers links to chapters and sections, so I assume 30 is a chapter and 4 a section, but when I go to chapter 30, section 4, I get a text about the murder of Saturninus, whereas I expected a passage that supports that Marius's reputation was in tatters. In 31.2 there is a passage "And now, thinking that his influence and reputation were gradually fading away because of his inactivity and quietude", which might be what you were trying to cite. I might of course be entirely wrong. Do you think the general English Wikipedia reader (from Nigeria for example) will know his way through this? I had never heard of Sallust and Plutarch and canonical references before starting this review. Otherwise, having been educated about these by you, I understand that the canonical method of citing should be taken into account as the classicist like you is perhaps more prone to want to look up the references than the Nigerian. I wonder whether there is not a way that would give both, the page and the canonical reference, in the {{ Sfn}}. Would you agree with {{Sfn|Plutarch|1920|p=[https://archive.org/details/L101PlutarchParallelLivesIXDemetriusAntonyPyrrhusGaiusMarius/page/n569/ 549|loc=40.3}}?
More to come, Johannes Schade ( talk) 15:48, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Plut. Mar. 30.4, yielding:
[4] Marius did all he could to save the men, but it was of no avail, and when they came down into the forum they were put to death. This affair made Marius obnoxious alike to the nobles and to the people, and when the time for electing censors came he did not present himself as a candidate, although everyone expected that he would, but allowed other and inferior men to be elected, for fear that he would be defeated. However, he tried to put a good face upon his conduct by saying that he was unwilling to incur the hatred of many citizens by a severe examination into their lives and manners.
loc
at the same time. It generates a nonsense citation like Blah 1990, p. 123, 1.2.3which is not helpful. I have no idea whether Nigerians are looking into Plutarch or not. I do know that if they are, they won't necessarily be paging through a c. 1920 edition of Parallel Lives. Ifly6 ( talk) 16:28, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
"Cicero, De oratore 2.194–196". - The GA criteria prescribe "it contains a list of all references (sources of information)". Cicero's works cited in the article are omitted in the list of sources. You might want to add them, but the GA criteria do not require it ("consistent formatting or including every element of the bibliographic material is not required").
"... proposed a greater division of state lands, ...". - I wonder what the "greater division" means and would welcome a clarification. I suspect the proposal did not only subdivide stateland in smaller parcels but also distribute or allot these parcels to landless people. Unluckily I cannot preview Duncan 2017 p 216.
"... Lesbos ...". - Link Lesbos (the Greek island).
"... beneficence of ability ...". - Do you mean "beneficence or ability"?
"Willingness". - Perhaps rather |readiness"?\
I think a timeline is a good idea, but there are Wikipedians going around that delete them as "duplicative".
The realistic timewise spacing along the line results in empty space during calm times on one hand and insufficient space on the other hand when things get busy. There might be other events less directly related to Marius that could be added for context, e.g. the reforms of the Gracchi, the Punic wars while he was a child. An ordinary tabular format would probably be more efficient . Se e.g. the timetable (collapsed) in James Butler, 1st Duke of Ormond. These are of course just comments that you can happily ignore.
So far. I will pause and think about whether there is anything outstanding. Best regards and thanks, Johannes Schade ( talk) 21:36, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Dear User:Ifly6 I think all concerns that are relevant according to the GA criteria have been resolved. Congratulations and many thanks for your patient explanations and replies. I learned a lot from you. Best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 09:17, 8 March 2022 (UTC)