Talk:Siege of Castelnuovo/GA1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 20:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this article soon to help clear some of the backup. It will be done either later today or tomorrow...--Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 20:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright...

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

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, where possible and appropriate.

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments:

1. What is the "Old Tercio of Naples?" Perhaps a brief explanation would work here. What goes in the lead should be mentioned in the body so a quick mention would be necessary. If the body's "Tercio" is the same as the "Old Tercio of Naples," this should be clearly demonstrated at least once.
2. In the Mediterranean, a Christian offensive attempted to eliminate the danger of the great Turkish fleet the year 1535, when a strong armada under Don Álvaro de Bazán and Andrea Doria captured the port of Tunis, expelling Admiral Hayreddin Barbarossa from the waters of the Western Mediterranean. What do you mean by the "year 1535?"
3. Its forces consisted of 15 companies whose captains were Machín de Munguía, Álvaro de Mendoza, Pedro de Sotomayor, Juan Vizcaíno, Luis Cerón, Jaime de Masquefá, Luis de Haro, Sancho de Frías, Olivera, Silva, Cambrana, Alcocer, Cusán, Borgoñón and Lázaro de Coron. Is there anything significant about these men, besides the fact that they led the Tercio?
4. It was costly in lives, as the Ottomans employed both infantry and artillery at the same time to assault and bombard Castelnuovo, resulting in heavy casualties among the Ottomans themselves. Was the casualty rate due to friendly fire, Spanish defending, or both?
5. This isn't really necessary since Spanish is a well-known language, but is there any way you could find an English translation of the poem in the Aftermath section?

Overall, the article is already good. I hope that my suggestions are both good and easy to fix. I will place it on hold until everything is fixed. Feel free to leave any comments if you disagree with mine.--Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 01:09, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. I'm trying to resolve the problem. The composition of the garrison seems a very complex affair. In any case, I should have written 'Old Tercio of Lombardy' instead 'Old Tercio of Naples'.
2. Sorry, it's a grammatical mistake. I should have put simply "in 1535".
3. Machín de Munguía had a prominent role in defending the town and was the subject of Barbarrossa's admiration and anger, but nothing else is known about the other soldiers.
4. Both, but my intention was to highlight the fact that the Ottoman artillery inflicted many casualties among their own ranks.
5. I'm looking for a good translation, but I have little hope of finding one.

Thank you for the review.--ElBufon (talk) 14:41, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I got the composition of the Tercio. It was a mixture of various units. I've put "elements of various Spanish tercios" in the intro. The second problem has also been resolved. About the third, I think the names may be eliminated except Munguía. What do you think? --ElBufon (talk) 15:05, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the names should stay so don't worry about deleting them if you can't find anything else. I'll add that the casualties came from friendly fire and Spanish defending. If you think it should be changed to something else, feel free to do so. Also, if you can't find an English translation of the poem, don't worry too much about it. As for now, I will pass the review. Well done! It was a very interesting article!--Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 20:44, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thank you very much.--ElBufon (talk) 05:52, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]