Talk:Siege of Gythium

Siege of Gythium has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 11, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed
April 3, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
September 9, 2007	Good article reassessment	Kept

Current status: Good article

Greece Mid‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Roman & Byzantine / Classical

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Roman and Byzantine military history task force
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

Failed "good article" nomination

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of November 11, 2006, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: There are several instances of ambiguity. I adressed some spelling and grammar issues in my copyedit, but there are things I dont know how to go about. For instance, you say: "1,000 picked warriors from Crete". What do you mean "picked"? Also, you mention the "Union of Free Laconians". What is that? You also seem to repeat some words, more specifically "the defenders became reinvigorated. The siege was proving more difficult until Flaminius arrived with 4,000 Roman soldiers.[13] With the arrival of the new soldiers, the allied soldiers were reinvigorated"

2. Factually accurate?: It appears accurate enough.

3. Broad in coverage?: Some points could bear with expanding, for instance the aftermath section.

4. Neutral point of view?: OK

5. Article stability? OK

6. Images?: OK

When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. Thanks for your work so far. --Druworos 11:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I have to agree. I'd also suggest smoothing out the lead - it reads rather choppily and is hard to get through, which is bad in the first thing a reader is confronted with. Adam Cuerden ^talk 16:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As of now the article looks fine so it has passed. Lakers 04:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article was poorly written In my opinion. I do believe there could have been more information. It also sounded a little one-sided. It seems people seldom put their own thoughts into their research, and this is not professional on a website that students use for school work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.27.34.106 (talk) 23:26, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

This is just minor, but I readjusted the footnotes to show multiple references to the same source under one title, as per Wikipedia:Footnotes#Citing_a_footnote_more_than_once. I also italicised the titles. Druworos 11:43, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA Sweeps Review Pass

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Conflicts, battles and military exercises" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I had to make a few corrections for some grammar mistakes, but I probably didn't catch them all, so have another look. The article would benefit with more expansion. Feel free to use online resources as well to help you find additional information and sources. Keep improving the article, and see if there are any other relevant free images you can include. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have edited the article history to reflect this review. Regards, --Nehrams2020 01:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Siege of Gythium/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Per WP:MILHIST. Well-citated but only for one source. It could be further expanded (I think). It has not map. But it is a nice job!--Yannismarou 08:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 08:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 09:11, 29 April 2016 (UTC)