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 - Gog the Mild ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 17:20, 1 May 2022 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Gallic Wars ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
Eight critical years that catapulted Julius Caesar to such wealth and fame that he was able to cross the Rubicon, putting in motion a civil war that would lead to the end the Roman Republic and rise an empire in its place. The war and its study raises important questions about what it means for the victor to write history. As my DYK noted, Julius Caesar's portrayal of his actions in the Gallic Wars have led historians to call him one of history's first "spin doctors."
I received an unusually thorough
GA review from Levivich, for which I am quite thankful. I thus think it ready to run the A-gauntlet. This is my first time at A-class, so please bear with me, there are some things I am still learning about MILHIST :)
CaptainEek
Edits Ho Cap'n!
⚓ 01:55, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Some source formatting issues here, from a quick look
Hog Farm Talk 05:34, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Ave User:CaptainEek. This looks indeed very good and I will probably have only minor remarks. I lack experience as a reviewer. Please, just ignore me when I talk rubbish or better point out where I went wrong—and thank you so much for having caused the deprecation of inline parenthetical referencing. You are famous for that and I think people expect more of the same from you. What about deprecating some of the duplicate citation templates. But now let's go into medias res. With many thanks and best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 17:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
Before the article content
Infobox
Roman Republic annexes Gaul. - Past tense is generally used in Wikipedia, hence change to "annexed".
Gaul becomes a Roman province. - Not really needed, omit, otherwise change to past tense.
image_size. - The default for the size of the image in the infobox is 220px. This value can be adjusted by the user and should therefore not be fixed to a size given in pixels (WP:IMGSIZE). You specify "| image_size = 300px".
|image_size=
should therefore be used only exceptionally. The |image_upright=
can be used instead or the "upright" parameter of the File: such as in: [[File]]: [[File:name|frameless|center|upright=1.4]]. The value 1.4 would specify a width of 308 pixels, given the mentioned default width.Lead
Britonic. - I would prefer "British". The article Roman Britain uses it. Wiktionary does not recognize "Britonic" as an English word. The words "Brittonic" and "Brythonic" pertain to a group of Celtic languages, that includes Welsh.
nearly defeated him. - I would prefer "almost defeated him" over "nearly defeated him" as "nearly" might be interpreted as meaning they were defeated by a narrow margin.
indomitable siege works at the Battle of Alesia crushed .... - The word "indomitable" means "which cannot be tamed" and is usually applied to living beings, not to siege works. Also, siege works, by themselves, seldom crush people.
consider it to be unreliable. - You discuss the strong and weak sides of Caesar's Commentaries very well elsewhere. This blunt statement seems excessive (IMHO). To say they are unreliable sounds as if not a single word were true and all pure invention: Caesar's book a hoax. Obviously, Caesar is biased, but his account cannot be rejected altogether. What we have from Cassius Dio (who is more objective) is often quite summary and lacks many details that matter in the present context. Johannes Schade ( talk) 10:25, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
Background: Sociopolitical
Gilliver 2003, pp. 7, 13–15. - This source is partly accessible by a (short) preview in Google Books, which already stops after page 14. Nevertheless, the
|url=
with the value
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=O1xsBgAAQBAJ should be added to the source description. Searches are also possible in Google Books. For the rest, the source is inaccessible, which is a pity because it is the most frequently used source in the article and renders the WP:V checking often impossible.*Only paragraph, citation (adequate range?), Retracted
Johannes Schade (
talk) 14:04, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Gilliver 2003, pp. 7, 13–15
. - The cited page 7 covers about all the content of the paragraph except the last sentence. Pages 13 and 14 of the source are about the Roman army. Page 15 is not part of the preview.
Background: Military
Matthew 2009, p 35–37. - The text on the three cited pages of the source should support all statements made in the paragraph that need such support. You state (last sentence) that "A cohort held 480 men, ten of which combined with a small cavalry, engineers, and officers made a legion of around 5,000 men." I find no support for this statement on the three cited pages (if I have read them carefully enough; it is a lot of reading). Please mark, I do not doubt that what you say is true. Page 14 of Gilliver could have been cited as support for this statement. Matthew as an English-language source should omit the
|language=
. Also, the page number (|pages=37 !?) should appear in the inline citation, not in the source list. The spacing of the bibliographic entry for Matthew differs from all the others.However, perhaps I should not insist too much on the WP:V here. User:Gog the Mild told me "Verifiability gets a relatively light touch at ACR." ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Donough_MacCarty,_1st_Earl_of_Clancarty#Notes), Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Ariovistus. - The Suebian king appears here for the first time, a bit abruptly. Perhaps he should have been introduced earlier as king of the Suebi.
Grant 1974, p. 87. - First citation from Grant. You cite Grant 1974. I found Grant 1969 at Internet Archive https://archive.org/details/juliuscaesar0000gran_k2z5/. It seems the pagination agrees. Please add the
|url=
in the corresponding source list entry.Goldsworthy 2007, p. 246. - First citation from Goldsworthy. There seem to be issues with differences in pagination in various editions. You cite the 2007 edition. Where did you read it? Internet Archive has the 2008 edition at https://archive.org/details/caesarlifeofcolo00gold/. There is a Wikipeia article about the book: Caesar, Life of a Colossus but linking it in the template throws an Cite-book error.
Walter 1952, p. 158. - Add
|url=
with value "
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.530976/" and |volume=
with value "1" (i.e. volume 1).Background: Julius Caesar
agonist. - Did you mean "protagonist"?
von Ungern-Sternberg 2014, p. 91. - Implemented using {{ Cite encyclopedia}} in the source list. Perhaps {{ Cite book}} would be better. I do not believe this is an encyclopedia. In either case a page range should be given that covers the chapter or article written by Von Ungern-Sternberg. Add
|edition=
with value "2nd". The 1st edition was published in 2004.via. - The preposition "via" (by the way of) should IMHO not be abused like this.
Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus. - Please consider linking Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus (consul 58 BC)
The assignment of the provinces that comprise what is now Northern Italy .... - I fail to see how present-day northern Italy corresponds to more than one former Roman province. Illyricum lies along the east coast of the Adriatic sea.
Chrissanthos. - Curiously, the book's correct title is "Julius and Caesar" (please correct this in the source list). Also, the bibliographic description for this source should include an ISBN rather than an OCLC (I believe only the one or the other is needed).
Chrissanthos 2019, p. 73. - This citation might be mistaken. The paragraph is mainly about the four legions Caesar had at this stage, but they are not even mentioned on page 73; or is the text I am reading ( https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=hUbzDwAAQBAJ) a differently paged edition?
It is possible that Gaul was not his initial target, he may have been planning a campaign against the Kingdom of Dacia .... - The sentence is supported by the citation "Caesar 1982" (in the middle of the paragraph), which lacks the page number or range (WP:PAGENUM). Add
|url=
with value "
https://archive.org/details/conquestofgaul00juli/" and |edition=
with value "2nd".Beginning of the wars
They intended to travel across Gaul to the west coast, a route that would have taken them around the Alps .... - I fail to see how a route from Switzerland to the Saintonge would "take them around the Alps". Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Caesar's consideration of the Gallic request to enter Rome .... Not "Rome" but "Roman land". Johannes Schade
Battle of Bibracte
on a sloped hill. - Would you agree that "on a slope" would be good enough?
a census written in Greek was found. - Which source says so? It is quite surely a misunderstanding. Caesar says it was written using Greek letters (litteris Graecis confectae; see https://archive.org/details/commentarii0102caesuoft/page/n71/) but does not state in which language it was written. It is well known that southern Gauls at Ceasar's time used the Greek alphabet when writing (which they did not do very often).
Historians believe .... - Such a statement about what historians believe requires a citation that states that there is agreement among experts who have considered the topic. You cannot get there by citing individual historians, even big numbers of them (WP:RS/AC). It might pass if you leave the historians out and say directly "The total probably was ..." giving a citation for the minimum and a citation for the maximum of the range.
Delbrück 1990, pp. 475. - A single page is cited, hence "p." and not "pp.". This is the first citation of Delbrück in the text (there also is one in the infobox). Delbrück's original title is "Geschichte de Kriegskunst ...". The work has four volumes. Three German editions were published in 1900, 1908 and 1920 (I do not suggest that you cite it in the German edition). Caesar should be in the first volume. The English translation is based on the 3rd edtion (1920) of the German work. Internet Archive has all four German volumes but only volume 3 of the English translation. The first volume can be previewed in Google Books at ( https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=MP2k4rx-Q_UC). I do not know where you read it, but it would be nice if you could use the edition described in Google Books. The preview includes the cited page 475 but unluckily not the page 46, cited further down in the text. Please complete the description given in the source list. Do not forget the "|author-link=Hans Delbrück", the volume number and the URL. I think it would be nice to mention the year of the original publication : "|orig-year=1st pub. 1920" in addition to the year of publicatio of the English version.
Caesar 1982, pp 25–29. - The paragraph is about Bibracte and is supported by a single citation "Caesar 1982, pp 25–29". I found this text in Internet Archive, 1982, 2nd edition, but the pages do not match. The cited pages 25–29 cover the end of the Introduction, written by Jane F Gardner (pp. 25–26), the Preface (p.26), and the beginning of the translation of Caesar's text (pp 28–29). I find the first mention of Bibracte on p 39. Please help me work out what is wrong.
Campaign against the Suebi
He found his excuse following victory over the Helvetii. A group of Gallic tribes congratulated him .... - These two sentences are supported by a citation "Walter 1952, p. 158". The cited page admittedly talks about Ariovistus but does not mention the "congratulation by a group of Gallic people".
Not only did Caesar have a responsibility to protect the longstanding allegiance of the Aedui, but this proposition presented an opportunity to expand Rome's borders, strengthen loyalty within Caesar’s army and establish him as the commander of Rome’s troops abroad.. - This sentence is supported by a citation "Goldsworthy 2007, p 271". The page 271 in the 2008 edition (Internet Archive https://archive.org/details/caesarlifeofcolo00gold/page/271/) is about the Usipetes and Tencteri. Quite obviously there is a shift in page numbers between the two editions. I wondered whether the text should not rather cite the page numbers from the accessible edition so that readers can follow, or if you could compare the two editions and tell me whether the shift is systematic and how big (in pages) the difference is? It would help reviewer a lot in the spotchecks usually expected in source reviews.
Caesar began marched towards it and arrived before Ariovistus- Replace with: "Caesar marched towards it and arrived before Ariovistus". The sentence is supported by a citation "Goldsworthy 2007, pp. 274–275". In the 2008 edition the corresponding page seems to be 225. Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
They met under a truce at a knoll outside of town.The sentence is supported by a citation referring to "Walter 1952, pp. 173–176". Walter (p. 173) states "It was somewhere in Alsace, between Thann and Mulhouse" but the article maintains it was outside Visontio (present-day Besançon). A clear contradiction between the text and the source. Needs to be resolved.
Celtic cities are in green, Germanic cities in orange. - I suppose you mean "tribes". On the map, the cities are all black dots. Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
57 BC: Campaigns in the east
Gilliver 2003, pp. 36–40. - This citation (numbered 47 at present) is used here for the first time and is used altogether 6 times for quite different content. Is it really each time adequate and covers each time all the supported text? Is the whole 4-page range each time needed or could it be more specific? I cannot verify because the preview in Goggle Books ends at page 14.
Intervening again in an intra-Gallic conflict, Caesar marched against the Belgae tribal confederation, who inhabited the area roughly bounded by modern-day Belgium. They had recently attacked a tribe allied with Rome and before marching with his army to meet them, Caesar ordered the Remi and other neighboring Gauls to investigate the Belgae's actions.. - These two sentences appear to be supported by a citation at the end of the 2nd sentence that reads "Esov 1996, p. 66". This citation indeed supports the second part of the second sentence "Caesar ordered the Remi and other neighboring Gauls to investigate the Belgae's actions." but not the text before it. It is however possible that the part before it is supported by the citation from Gilliver at the end of the paragraph, which I cannot read because Gilliver is not accessible beyond p 14. Could the tribe allied with Rome be named?
The Belgae and the Romans encountered each other near Bibrax.- Replace with: "The Belgae and the Romans met near Bibrax, the main oppidum (fortified settlement) of the Remi ...", Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
The Nervii ambush: the battle of the Sabis
The Nervii set up an ambush along the river Sambre. - According to the article Battle of the Sabis, the river was not the Sambre but the Selle near Saulzoir. Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Caesar's cockiness had nearly ended in defeat. - As above in the lead, I suggest "almost" instead of "nearly" for clarity.
The Belgae were broken, and most of the Germanic tribes offered submission to Rome. - Caesar does not include the Belgae among the Celts in his famous first sentence "Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur." Authors discuss whether the Belgae were Germanic or Celtic in language or origin and it remains more or less unknown or uncertain. Also see the Nordwestblock hypothesis. The article does not mention Germanic tribes among the Belgae before and the cited sentence is therefore difficult to understand for the reader. Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
He saw a minor setback towards winter as he sent one of his officers to the Great St Bernard Pass, where local tribes fought back fiercely; he abandoned the campaign.. - Hardly understandable. Possibly marginal to the subject. Explain better, or remove? The French article (Guerre des Gaules) explains this episode with considerable detail. IMHO I would leave it out. One may even doubt whether the present-day Valais, where this happened, was part of Gaul. Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
56 BC: Campaign against the Veneti
anger Rome and prepared. - I suggest a more precise use of the tense: "had prepared", in order to stress anteriority.
and Quintus Titurius Sabinus took forces to Normandy.. - The name "Normandy" is of course anachronistic. Probably best to call it "present-day Normandy". You did this very correctly in the 1st sentence of the lead. Just keep it up. We are talking about a time, long long ago.
Battle of Morbihan
Rome is in red, Veneti in green. - Replace with: "Romans in red, Veneti in green" Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
At last, the Roman fleet sailed, and encountered the Venetic fleet off the coast of Brittany in the Gulf of Morbihan.- The name "Morbihan" (Breton: mor-bihan; sea, little) is of course anachronistic. I would suggest "present-day Gulf of Morbihan".
Caesar's subordinates and mopping up
During the Venetic campaign, Caesar's subordinates had been busy pacifying Normandy and Aquitania.. - Anachronism. Probably "present-day Normandy".
The tribes consequently surrendered, yielding up all of Normandy to the Romans.. - Again: present-day Normandy.
Crossing the Rhine and the English channel
Revolts in Gaul
sfn|Luibheid|1970|88–94. - Missing parameter name. Should be ("pp=" added): "{{sfn|Luibheid|1970|pp=88–94}}".
captured a number of Roman troops as prisoners. - I suggest "taken some Romans prisoners".
52 BC: Vercingetorix's revolt
Caesar took a winding route to the Gallic army to capture several oppidium for food.. - Replace with "Caesar took a winding route to the Gallic army to capture several oppida for food.". The Latin plural of "oppidum" is "oppida" (how did you come to "oppidium"?), otherwise you can use an English plural and write oppidums (IMHO less favored).
Siege of Alesia, end of the revolt
1st paragraph, 1st sentence, citation: Delbrück 1990, p. 46
. - Page 46 is unluckily not part of the preview in Google Books. However, on p. 499 there is a suitable citation which says that 80,000 gauls were defending the oppidum. Please check whether this is an error in the page number.
Pacification of the last Gauls
2nd paragraph: The legions were again wintered in Gaul
. - Why passive voice?
The commentarii
Grillo & Krebs 2018, p. 7. - Grillo & Krebs can be previewed in Google Books. The
|url=
in the source list should point to:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DpNADwAAQBAJ, not to WorldCat. The author should be added. Published in 2018, this should mention an ISBN instead of the OCLC.Henige 1998. - The citation lacks the page. You must provide locations (WP:PAGENUM)
Grillo & Krebs 2018, pp. 20–27. - I read the text of the citation at https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DpNADwAAQBAJ where the cited page range is part of a chapter written by Raaflaub. He should be presented as the author, whereas Grillo and Krebs are editors of the collection.
In literature
Herzfeld 1960, p. 214. - The title of Herzfeld's book is "Geschichte in Gestalten". It is a collection of short biographies, written by various authors in many volumes. Caesar is in the 1st volume. The book is written in German. It does not seem to be accessible online. We have Adcock: "Caesar as Man of Letters", which can be read at: https://archive.org/search.php?query=Caesar%20as%20man%20of%20letters. Could Adcock be used instead Herzfeld? WP:NONENG prescribes "English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when they're available and of equal quality and relevance."
User:CaptainEek, I have completed my first traverse. Best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:40, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi CaptainEek, I note that you haven't posted here for a couple of months. I was wondering if you were still interested in taking this nomination forward. Could you confirm, or otherwise? Thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 16:55, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
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 - Gog the Mild ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 17:20, 1 May 2022 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
Gallic Wars ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Toolbox |
---|
Eight critical years that catapulted Julius Caesar to such wealth and fame that he was able to cross the Rubicon, putting in motion a civil war that would lead to the end the Roman Republic and rise an empire in its place. The war and its study raises important questions about what it means for the victor to write history. As my DYK noted, Julius Caesar's portrayal of his actions in the Gallic Wars have led historians to call him one of history's first "spin doctors."
I received an unusually thorough
GA review from Levivich, for which I am quite thankful. I thus think it ready to run the A-gauntlet. This is my first time at A-class, so please bear with me, there are some things I am still learning about MILHIST :)
CaptainEek
Edits Ho Cap'n!
⚓ 01:55, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Some source formatting issues here, from a quick look
Hog Farm Talk 05:34, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Ave User:CaptainEek. This looks indeed very good and I will probably have only minor remarks. I lack experience as a reviewer. Please, just ignore me when I talk rubbish or better point out where I went wrong—and thank you so much for having caused the deprecation of inline parenthetical referencing. You are famous for that and I think people expect more of the same from you. What about deprecating some of the duplicate citation templates. But now let's go into medias res. With many thanks and best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 17:32, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
Before the article content
Infobox
Roman Republic annexes Gaul. - Past tense is generally used in Wikipedia, hence change to "annexed".
Gaul becomes a Roman province. - Not really needed, omit, otherwise change to past tense.
image_size. - The default for the size of the image in the infobox is 220px. This value can be adjusted by the user and should therefore not be fixed to a size given in pixels (WP:IMGSIZE). You specify "| image_size = 300px".
|image_size=
should therefore be used only exceptionally. The |image_upright=
can be used instead or the "upright" parameter of the File: such as in: [[File]]: [[File:name|frameless|center|upright=1.4]]. The value 1.4 would specify a width of 308 pixels, given the mentioned default width.Lead
Britonic. - I would prefer "British". The article Roman Britain uses it. Wiktionary does not recognize "Britonic" as an English word. The words "Brittonic" and "Brythonic" pertain to a group of Celtic languages, that includes Welsh.
nearly defeated him. - I would prefer "almost defeated him" over "nearly defeated him" as "nearly" might be interpreted as meaning they were defeated by a narrow margin.
indomitable siege works at the Battle of Alesia crushed .... - The word "indomitable" means "which cannot be tamed" and is usually applied to living beings, not to siege works. Also, siege works, by themselves, seldom crush people.
consider it to be unreliable. - You discuss the strong and weak sides of Caesar's Commentaries very well elsewhere. This blunt statement seems excessive (IMHO). To say they are unreliable sounds as if not a single word were true and all pure invention: Caesar's book a hoax. Obviously, Caesar is biased, but his account cannot be rejected altogether. What we have from Cassius Dio (who is more objective) is often quite summary and lacks many details that matter in the present context. Johannes Schade ( talk) 10:25, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
Background: Sociopolitical
Gilliver 2003, pp. 7, 13–15. - This source is partly accessible by a (short) preview in Google Books, which already stops after page 14. Nevertheless, the
|url=
with the value
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=O1xsBgAAQBAJ should be added to the source description. Searches are also possible in Google Books. For the rest, the source is inaccessible, which is a pity because it is the most frequently used source in the article and renders the WP:V checking often impossible.*Only paragraph, citation (adequate range?), Retracted
Johannes Schade (
talk) 14:04, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Gilliver 2003, pp. 7, 13–15
. - The cited page 7 covers about all the content of the paragraph except the last sentence. Pages 13 and 14 of the source are about the Roman army. Page 15 is not part of the preview.
Background: Military
Matthew 2009, p 35–37. - The text on the three cited pages of the source should support all statements made in the paragraph that need such support. You state (last sentence) that "A cohort held 480 men, ten of which combined with a small cavalry, engineers, and officers made a legion of around 5,000 men." I find no support for this statement on the three cited pages (if I have read them carefully enough; it is a lot of reading). Please mark, I do not doubt that what you say is true. Page 14 of Gilliver could have been cited as support for this statement. Matthew as an English-language source should omit the
|language=
. Also, the page number (|pages=37 !?) should appear in the inline citation, not in the source list. The spacing of the bibliographic entry for Matthew differs from all the others.However, perhaps I should not insist too much on the WP:V here. User:Gog the Mild told me "Verifiability gets a relatively light touch at ACR." ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Donough_MacCarty,_1st_Earl_of_Clancarty#Notes), Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Ariovistus. - The Suebian king appears here for the first time, a bit abruptly. Perhaps he should have been introduced earlier as king of the Suebi.
Grant 1974, p. 87. - First citation from Grant. You cite Grant 1974. I found Grant 1969 at Internet Archive https://archive.org/details/juliuscaesar0000gran_k2z5/. It seems the pagination agrees. Please add the
|url=
in the corresponding source list entry.Goldsworthy 2007, p. 246. - First citation from Goldsworthy. There seem to be issues with differences in pagination in various editions. You cite the 2007 edition. Where did you read it? Internet Archive has the 2008 edition at https://archive.org/details/caesarlifeofcolo00gold/. There is a Wikipeia article about the book: Caesar, Life of a Colossus but linking it in the template throws an Cite-book error.
Walter 1952, p. 158. - Add
|url=
with value "
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.530976/" and |volume=
with value "1" (i.e. volume 1).Background: Julius Caesar
agonist. - Did you mean "protagonist"?
von Ungern-Sternberg 2014, p. 91. - Implemented using {{ Cite encyclopedia}} in the source list. Perhaps {{ Cite book}} would be better. I do not believe this is an encyclopedia. In either case a page range should be given that covers the chapter or article written by Von Ungern-Sternberg. Add
|edition=
with value "2nd". The 1st edition was published in 2004.via. - The preposition "via" (by the way of) should IMHO not be abused like this.
Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus. - Please consider linking Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus (consul 58 BC)
The assignment of the provinces that comprise what is now Northern Italy .... - I fail to see how present-day northern Italy corresponds to more than one former Roman province. Illyricum lies along the east coast of the Adriatic sea.
Chrissanthos. - Curiously, the book's correct title is "Julius and Caesar" (please correct this in the source list). Also, the bibliographic description for this source should include an ISBN rather than an OCLC (I believe only the one or the other is needed).
Chrissanthos 2019, p. 73. - This citation might be mistaken. The paragraph is mainly about the four legions Caesar had at this stage, but they are not even mentioned on page 73; or is the text I am reading ( https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=hUbzDwAAQBAJ) a differently paged edition?
It is possible that Gaul was not his initial target, he may have been planning a campaign against the Kingdom of Dacia .... - The sentence is supported by the citation "Caesar 1982" (in the middle of the paragraph), which lacks the page number or range (WP:PAGENUM). Add
|url=
with value "
https://archive.org/details/conquestofgaul00juli/" and |edition=
with value "2nd".Beginning of the wars
They intended to travel across Gaul to the west coast, a route that would have taken them around the Alps .... - I fail to see how a route from Switzerland to the Saintonge would "take them around the Alps". Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Caesar's consideration of the Gallic request to enter Rome .... Not "Rome" but "Roman land". Johannes Schade
Battle of Bibracte
on a sloped hill. - Would you agree that "on a slope" would be good enough?
a census written in Greek was found. - Which source says so? It is quite surely a misunderstanding. Caesar says it was written using Greek letters (litteris Graecis confectae; see https://archive.org/details/commentarii0102caesuoft/page/n71/) but does not state in which language it was written. It is well known that southern Gauls at Ceasar's time used the Greek alphabet when writing (which they did not do very often).
Historians believe .... - Such a statement about what historians believe requires a citation that states that there is agreement among experts who have considered the topic. You cannot get there by citing individual historians, even big numbers of them (WP:RS/AC). It might pass if you leave the historians out and say directly "The total probably was ..." giving a citation for the minimum and a citation for the maximum of the range.
Delbrück 1990, pp. 475. - A single page is cited, hence "p." and not "pp.". This is the first citation of Delbrück in the text (there also is one in the infobox). Delbrück's original title is "Geschichte de Kriegskunst ...". The work has four volumes. Three German editions were published in 1900, 1908 and 1920 (I do not suggest that you cite it in the German edition). Caesar should be in the first volume. The English translation is based on the 3rd edtion (1920) of the German work. Internet Archive has all four German volumes but only volume 3 of the English translation. The first volume can be previewed in Google Books at ( https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=MP2k4rx-Q_UC). I do not know where you read it, but it would be nice if you could use the edition described in Google Books. The preview includes the cited page 475 but unluckily not the page 46, cited further down in the text. Please complete the description given in the source list. Do not forget the "|author-link=Hans Delbrück", the volume number and the URL. I think it would be nice to mention the year of the original publication : "|orig-year=1st pub. 1920" in addition to the year of publicatio of the English version.
Caesar 1982, pp 25–29. - The paragraph is about Bibracte and is supported by a single citation "Caesar 1982, pp 25–29". I found this text in Internet Archive, 1982, 2nd edition, but the pages do not match. The cited pages 25–29 cover the end of the Introduction, written by Jane F Gardner (pp. 25–26), the Preface (p.26), and the beginning of the translation of Caesar's text (pp 28–29). I find the first mention of Bibracte on p 39. Please help me work out what is wrong.
Campaign against the Suebi
He found his excuse following victory over the Helvetii. A group of Gallic tribes congratulated him .... - These two sentences are supported by a citation "Walter 1952, p. 158". The cited page admittedly talks about Ariovistus but does not mention the "congratulation by a group of Gallic people".
Not only did Caesar have a responsibility to protect the longstanding allegiance of the Aedui, but this proposition presented an opportunity to expand Rome's borders, strengthen loyalty within Caesar’s army and establish him as the commander of Rome’s troops abroad.. - This sentence is supported by a citation "Goldsworthy 2007, p 271". The page 271 in the 2008 edition (Internet Archive https://archive.org/details/caesarlifeofcolo00gold/page/271/) is about the Usipetes and Tencteri. Quite obviously there is a shift in page numbers between the two editions. I wondered whether the text should not rather cite the page numbers from the accessible edition so that readers can follow, or if you could compare the two editions and tell me whether the shift is systematic and how big (in pages) the difference is? It would help reviewer a lot in the spotchecks usually expected in source reviews.
Caesar began marched towards it and arrived before Ariovistus- Replace with: "Caesar marched towards it and arrived before Ariovistus". The sentence is supported by a citation "Goldsworthy 2007, pp. 274–275". In the 2008 edition the corresponding page seems to be 225. Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
They met under a truce at a knoll outside of town.The sentence is supported by a citation referring to "Walter 1952, pp. 173–176". Walter (p. 173) states "It was somewhere in Alsace, between Thann and Mulhouse" but the article maintains it was outside Visontio (present-day Besançon). A clear contradiction between the text and the source. Needs to be resolved.
Celtic cities are in green, Germanic cities in orange. - I suppose you mean "tribes". On the map, the cities are all black dots. Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
57 BC: Campaigns in the east
Gilliver 2003, pp. 36–40. - This citation (numbered 47 at present) is used here for the first time and is used altogether 6 times for quite different content. Is it really each time adequate and covers each time all the supported text? Is the whole 4-page range each time needed or could it be more specific? I cannot verify because the preview in Goggle Books ends at page 14.
Intervening again in an intra-Gallic conflict, Caesar marched against the Belgae tribal confederation, who inhabited the area roughly bounded by modern-day Belgium. They had recently attacked a tribe allied with Rome and before marching with his army to meet them, Caesar ordered the Remi and other neighboring Gauls to investigate the Belgae's actions.. - These two sentences appear to be supported by a citation at the end of the 2nd sentence that reads "Esov 1996, p. 66". This citation indeed supports the second part of the second sentence "Caesar ordered the Remi and other neighboring Gauls to investigate the Belgae's actions." but not the text before it. It is however possible that the part before it is supported by the citation from Gilliver at the end of the paragraph, which I cannot read because Gilliver is not accessible beyond p 14. Could the tribe allied with Rome be named?
The Belgae and the Romans encountered each other near Bibrax.- Replace with: "The Belgae and the Romans met near Bibrax, the main oppidum (fortified settlement) of the Remi ...", Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
The Nervii ambush: the battle of the Sabis
The Nervii set up an ambush along the river Sambre. - According to the article Battle of the Sabis, the river was not the Sambre but the Selle near Saulzoir. Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Caesar's cockiness had nearly ended in defeat. - As above in the lead, I suggest "almost" instead of "nearly" for clarity.
The Belgae were broken, and most of the Germanic tribes offered submission to Rome. - Caesar does not include the Belgae among the Celts in his famous first sentence "Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur." Authors discuss whether the Belgae were Germanic or Celtic in language or origin and it remains more or less unknown or uncertain. Also see the Nordwestblock hypothesis. The article does not mention Germanic tribes among the Belgae before and the cited sentence is therefore difficult to understand for the reader. Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
He saw a minor setback towards winter as he sent one of his officers to the Great St Bernard Pass, where local tribes fought back fiercely; he abandoned the campaign.. - Hardly understandable. Possibly marginal to the subject. Explain better, or remove? The French article (Guerre des Gaules) explains this episode with considerable detail. IMHO I would leave it out. One may even doubt whether the present-day Valais, where this happened, was part of Gaul. Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
56 BC: Campaign against the Veneti
anger Rome and prepared. - I suggest a more precise use of the tense: "had prepared", in order to stress anteriority.
and Quintus Titurius Sabinus took forces to Normandy.. - The name "Normandy" is of course anachronistic. Probably best to call it "present-day Normandy". You did this very correctly in the 1st sentence of the lead. Just keep it up. We are talking about a time, long long ago.
Battle of Morbihan
Rome is in red, Veneti in green. - Replace with: "Romans in red, Veneti in green" Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
At last, the Roman fleet sailed, and encountered the Venetic fleet off the coast of Brittany in the Gulf of Morbihan.- The name "Morbihan" (Breton: mor-bihan; sea, little) is of course anachronistic. I would suggest "present-day Gulf of Morbihan".
Caesar's subordinates and mopping up
During the Venetic campaign, Caesar's subordinates had been busy pacifying Normandy and Aquitania.. - Anachronism. Probably "present-day Normandy".
The tribes consequently surrendered, yielding up all of Normandy to the Romans.. - Again: present-day Normandy.
Crossing the Rhine and the English channel
Revolts in Gaul
sfn|Luibheid|1970|88–94. - Missing parameter name. Should be ("pp=" added): "{{sfn|Luibheid|1970|pp=88–94}}".
captured a number of Roman troops as prisoners. - I suggest "taken some Romans prisoners".
52 BC: Vercingetorix's revolt
Caesar took a winding route to the Gallic army to capture several oppidium for food.. - Replace with "Caesar took a winding route to the Gallic army to capture several oppida for food.". The Latin plural of "oppidum" is "oppida" (how did you come to "oppidium"?), otherwise you can use an English plural and write oppidums (IMHO less favored).
Siege of Alesia, end of the revolt
1st paragraph, 1st sentence, citation: Delbrück 1990, p. 46
. - Page 46 is unluckily not part of the preview in Google Books. However, on p. 499 there is a suitable citation which says that 80,000 gauls were defending the oppidum. Please check whether this is an error in the page number.
Pacification of the last Gauls
2nd paragraph: The legions were again wintered in Gaul
. - Why passive voice?
The commentarii
Grillo & Krebs 2018, p. 7. - Grillo & Krebs can be previewed in Google Books. The
|url=
in the source list should point to:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DpNADwAAQBAJ, not to WorldCat. The author should be added. Published in 2018, this should mention an ISBN instead of the OCLC.Henige 1998. - The citation lacks the page. You must provide locations (WP:PAGENUM)
Grillo & Krebs 2018, pp. 20–27. - I read the text of the citation at https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DpNADwAAQBAJ where the cited page range is part of a chapter written by Raaflaub. He should be presented as the author, whereas Grillo and Krebs are editors of the collection.
In literature
Herzfeld 1960, p. 214. - The title of Herzfeld's book is "Geschichte in Gestalten". It is a collection of short biographies, written by various authors in many volumes. Caesar is in the 1st volume. The book is written in German. It does not seem to be accessible online. We have Adcock: "Caesar as Man of Letters", which can be read at: https://archive.org/search.php?query=Caesar%20as%20man%20of%20letters. Could Adcock be used instead Herzfeld? WP:NONENG prescribes "English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when they're available and of equal quality and relevance."
User:CaptainEek, I have completed my first traverse. Best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 20:40, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi CaptainEek, I note that you haven't posted here for a couple of months. I was wondering if you were still interested in taking this nomination forward. Could you confirm, or otherwise? Thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 16:55, 1 May 2022 (UTC)