Talk:Battle of Adys

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Adys/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Catlemur (talk · contribs) 14:16, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

I will start the review shortly.--Catlemur (talk) 14:16, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

• Mention Tipps's full name just as you did with Bagnall.

I would like to, but they don't ever seem to have published or been referred to as anything other than "G.K.". The internet simply doesn't have a full name.

• Note 5 is unrefenrenced.

Fixed.

• Did the battle take place in 255 BC or 256 BC? The infobox and lede contradict each other.

My typo. Apologies. Fixed. Thanks.

• "The Carthaginians pursuing chased the Roman force off the hill" - reword this sentence.

Done.

• The infobox claims that there were probably 15,000+ Carthaginians, this is not mentioned explicitly in the Armies section.

Amended to the correct figure of 16,000+. The armies section states "the Carthaginians fielded 100 elephants, 4,000 cavalry and 12,000 infantry". It seems insulting to the reader to add "which totals over 16,000."

--Catlemur (talk) 21:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Catlemur, and many thanks for going through this. Your points addressed above. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:35, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Congratulations on another GA.--Catlemur (talk) 16:07, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

   Thanks Catlemur, I appreciate the review. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:30, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Page repeat

@Gog the Mild: I am 100% sure; the second "p. 15" in the "Hoyos 2007, p. 15; p.15, n. 1." citation is a repeat. On page 15 of the source I don't see "p 15. p. 15" can you pointed that out to me? If it's not a repeat what should it be considered then? Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 21:18, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi CPA-5, usually a reference to a page excludes any footnotes on it. References to footnotes are indicated by giving the page number then the footnote number. In this case I want to refer to both a page, and a footnote (which happens to be on the same page. Hence "p. 15", meaning 'see page 15'; followed by "p. 15, n. 1", meaning 'also see footnote 1 on page 15'.

You write 'I don't see "p 15. p. 15"'. but I haven't written that - so I can't point it out. What I wrote is correctly copied by you in your first sentence - this is not me being awkward, the distinction is vital. (If I had written "p 15. p. 15" then you would be correct to query it.) I assume that if a citation read, say, 'Hoyos 2007, p. 156; p. 217, n. 2' you wouldn't have an issue with it?

I hope that this helps. As I wrote in the edit summary, I am certainly open to suggestions for alternative ways of communicating the information. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:32, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

CE

Did a cheeky little post-furlough, drive-by ce; auto ed, cite scan, dupe wiki search, rm ref = harv as it's now redundant in the template structure, tidied the odd typo and grammatical solecism. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 08:52, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Title of article and caps in prose

Searches are indicating that "Adis" is the common name (spelling) for the location and that "battle of A" (aggregating both spellings) should not be capped in prose per MOS:CAPS since it is not consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources. See: ngram Adis/Adys, ngram: no result Battle of Adys, ngram: no result Battle of Adis, Google scholar: Battle of Adis, Google scholar: Battle of Adys, JSTOR: no result Battle of Adis, JSTOR: Battle of Adys, Archive.org: Battle of Adis, Archive.org: Battle of Adys, Google books: Battle of Adys, Google books: Battle of Adis. Incidentally, there is a disambiguation page for Adis that directs to the location, Uthina. There is presently nothing for "Adys". Cinderella157 (talk) 05:40, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

"Battle" has been de-capped.

Checking the HQ RSs I have readily to hand, Tipps, Miles, Goldsworthy, Lazenby, Rankov and Scullard (the last in The Cambridge Ancient History) - all specialist historians of this period - use "Adys". The only HQ RS I can find using "Adis" is Bagnall. So there would seem to be a clear consensus in the HQ RSs to refer to this battle as Adys. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:57, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Tunisian Republic location map Topographic.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Possible date confusion

Seeing as Regulus became consul in 256 BCE, and his consulship was prorogued into 255 after the battle of Adys, which was the culmination of his winter fighting in north Africa, then surely the battle was in late 256 / early 255, not late 255.

Furthermore, his downfall to Xanthippus was in Spring of 255 BCE, according the wikipedia article about the battle of the Bagradas river, as well as the JSTOR article on the downfall of Regulus. I'm happy to be corrected if I've got the wrong end of the stick! Awoogamuffin (talk) 00:03, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Awoogamuffin, you have a firm grip on the entirely correct end of the stick. What a stupid error - many thanks for picking it up. All, I hope, now sorted. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:39, 10 July 2023 (UTC)