Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Corinthian War: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:44, 6 April 2006

Latest revision as of 20:18, 9 February 2023

(22 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)

Line 4:

**If you were to change the initials, wouldn't it be BCE, not CE? [[User:Andjam|Andjam]] 00:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

**It's BC in all our other ancient history articles; we should probably keep it like this for consistency. [[User:Robth|Robth]]^{[[User Talk:Robth|Talk]]} 03:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

***The Wikipedia community spent a long time bludgeoning itself into a pulp over AD/BC / BCE/CE before reaching the solution that either is acceptable, as with American English and British/International English. See [[WP:MOSDATE#Eras]]. -- [[User:ALoan|ALoan]] [[User talk:ALoan|(Talk)]] 15:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''Support''', everything raised during the peer review has been adressed and this is an otherwise excellent article. I would make the map a little smaller, though; it takes up most of the screen even on 1024x768. [[User:Kirill Lokshin|Kirill Lok]][[User:Kirill Lokshin/Esperanza|<font color="green">s</font>]][[User:Kirill Lokshin/Military history|<font color="#960018">h</font>]][[User:Kirill Lokshin|in]] 22:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

****Well, whether it's BCE or BC, I still don't think "394 BC" is a good title for that section. [[User:The Disco King|The Disco King]] 16:39, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

*****Has now been retitled. [[User:Robth|Robth]]^{[[User Talk:Robth|Talk]]} 19:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''Support''', everything raised during the peer review has been adressed and this is an otherwise excellent article. I would make the map a little smaller, though; it takes up most of the screen even on 1024x768. [[User:Kirill Lokshin|Kirill Lok]][[User:Kirill Lokshin/Esperanza|<fontspan colorstyle="color:green;">s</fontspan>]][[User:Kirill Lokshin/Military history|<fontspan colorstyle="color:#960018;">h</fontspan>]][[User:Kirill Lokshin|in]] 22:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

**Shrank the map. Looks better. [[User:Robth|Robth]]^{[[User Talk:Robth|Talk]]} 03:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''Comment'''- Noticed a few things.

Line 43 ⟶ 46:

# No external links

#:There really aren't a lot of good internet sources for this kind of topic. I haven't seen anything that really seems worth putting in.

:The writing, at times, was confusing, and the way you split up the article is also kind of odd. Sory about the screwed up numbering and hope I helped... -[[User:Osbus|Osbus]] 23:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

::All interspersed comments above are mine. Hopefully this addresses your concerns. Thanks for the comments! [[User:Robth|Robth]]^{[[User Talk:Robth|Talk]]} 03:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

:::Good comments, but neither the presence of redlinks nor the absence of external links is a problem. -- [[User:ALoan|ALoan]] [[User talk:ALoan|(Talk)]] 15:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

::::External links can he helpful, and more than three red links, in my opinion, is a little much. But since all of the above has been mostly addressed,

:::::Oh, sure, external links can be helpful, and it is nice to turn red links blue, but what I meant by "not a problem" was "is not relevant in terms of [[WP:WIAFA]]". -- [[User:ALoan|ALoan]] [[User talk:ALoan|(Talk)]] 22:48, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''Support'''. -[[User:Osbus|Osbus]] 21:20, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''Support''' Terrific article.[[User:UberCryxic|UberCryxic]] 03:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''Comment''' one of the quotes is missing an opening " - also there are a few short paragraphs. Other then that it looks good. <small>[[User:RN|Just another star in the night]] ^{[[User talk:RN|<span style="color:#6BA800;">T</span>]] | [[Special:Emailuser/RN|<span style="color:#0033FF;">@</span>]] | [[Special:Contributions/RN|<span style="color:#FF0000;">C</span>]]}</small> 01:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

**Someone else commented on the short sections earlier; I've merged the two shortest. I can't seem to find this missing quotation mark, though. [[User:Robth|Robth]]^{[[User Talk:Robth|Talk]]} 05:56, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''Oppose''' No external links or see also sections. The section title "Sparta wins on land but loses at sea" doens't sound right. Also, the footnotes should be above the refrences, not below. [[User:Tobyk777|Tobyk777]] 19:12, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

**I've changed the heading to "War on land and sea (394 BC)." As far as the others, see also is only necessary if there are relevant links that haven't been included in the article body, and external links only if there are external links that provide added value. In terms of section order at the bottom, I don't know that there's a clear preference; I always put the footnotes last since I figure people will be coming to them by clicking on a note rather than scrolling all the way down to them. [[User:Robth|Robth]]^{[[User Talk:Robth|Talk]]} 02:56, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''Support''' I found the unbalanced quotation mark; it was right before footnote 44. In my own (exalted) judgment, "See Also" sections are at best superfluous, so I don't regret the lack of one here. [[User:Anville|Anville]] 11:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''Support''' (I commented before :)) <small>[[User:RN|Just another star in the night]] ^{[[User talk:RN|<span style="color:#6BA800;">T</span>]] | [[Special:Emailuser/RN|<span style="color:#0033FF;">@</span>]] | [[Special:Contributions/RN|<span style="color:#FF0000;">C</span>]]}</small> 14:31, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''Strong Support''' I like history, this is a Historical Article that must be featured. [[User:Anonymous anonymous|Anonymous anonymous]] 17:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

*Oh, '''support''', of course. -- [[User:ALoan|ALoan]] [[User talk:ALoan|(Talk)]] 18:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

*'''Note''': In light of [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-April/043624.html this post] on the mailing list, I've replaced the vase painting at the start of the article with a US government image, just to be on the safe side copyright-wise. [[User:Robth|Robth]]^{[[User Talk:Robth|Talk]]} 02:19, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

*<s>'''Conditional support''', the condition being that the one-paragraph sections get merged into other sections or expanded. One-paragraph sections are very ugly. --[[user:Celestianpower|Cel]][[User:Celestianpower/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">es</span>]][[User:celestianpower|tianpower]] ^{[[user talk:Celestianpower|háblame]]} 11:20, 13 April 2006 (UTC)</s>

*:Well, there are only four one-paragraph section, three in the section "War on land and sea (394 BC)", each of which refers to an important battle (Nemea, Cnidus, Coronea), and the introductory paragraph in the section "Later events (393 BC to 388 BC)". I'm sorry, but I think they should stay. I would be tempted to add {{tl|main}}, though. -- [[User:ALoan|ALoan]] [[User talk:ALoan|(Talk)]] 12:23, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

*::The "later events" one is fine, it's not a section outright. Why don't you merge the three into a three paragraph section (War on land and sea) ''and'' add a {{tl|main}} tag to the top, citing all three? --[[user:Celestianpower|Cel]][[User:Celestianpower/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">es</span>]][[User:celestianpower|tianpower]] ^{[[user talk:Celestianpower|háblame]]} 12:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

*:::That (one large section) was actually the original format; I changed it because it made for a rather longish section. I just went through and added {{tl|main}} to the three battle sections, but I would like to keep them; I think they're rather logical breaking points. [[User:Robth|Robth]]^{[[User Talk:Robth|Talk]]} 16:07, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

*:::: Okay, I can live with that, '''full support''', great article. --[[user:Celestianpower|Cel]][[User:Celestianpower/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">es</span>]][[User:celestianpower|tianpower]] ^{[[user talk:Celestianpower|háblame]]} 10:07, 17 April 2006 (UTC)