Talk:Battle of Arachova

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cplakidas (talk · contribs) 18:30, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, great to see a battle of the Greek War of Independence here. I will review over the following days. Constantine ✍ 18:30, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Cplakidas: ?--Catlemur (talk) 20:13, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Catlemur, was unexpectedly busy in RL and did not have the time to spare for this. Will review today. Constantine ✍ 09:51, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review list

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (
    lists
    )    :
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (
    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:

Comments

  • It was fought between an Ottoman Empire force under the command of Mustafa Bey and Greek irregulars under Georgios Karaiskakis. Were the Ottomans not also irregulars? Apart from the Egyptians and some elements of Mehmed Reshid's army, the Ottoman troops throughout the Greek War of Independence were not really a regular force. So unless this was indeed a contest between regular troops and irregulars, I would suggest replacing 'irregulars' with 'rebels' or something else.
 Done
  • Please indicate whether the dates are new style (Gregorian) or old style (Julian).
 Done
  • village of Arachova. give an indication of the approximate location ("in central Greece" or similar)
 Done
  • per
    WP:LEDE
    , the lead section must summarize the article. Currently the entire 'Background' section is missing.
 Done
  • During the course of the second half...thus initiating the Greek War of Independence IMO the entire section is redundant; it goes way beyond the necessary background for a battle late in a war. It would be like making an intro about the Battle of Stalingrad beginning with 'In 1917 the October Revolution brought the communists to power in Russia'. Just state that the war began in 1821, and that by 1826 the Greeks "had been severely weakened..."
 Done
  • Ali Pasha's invasion of Mani I think you've confused Ibrahim with Ali Pasha. I would also recommend adding the arrival of Ibrahim and his disciplined Egyptians as a decisive factor in turning the tide, and mention Mehmed Reshid Pasha here (not "Kioutahi Pasha"). You namedrop them, but without giving the reader an idea of who they were/why they were significant.
 Done
  • Following the conclusion of the Third Siege of Missolonghi 'conclusion' does not make understood that the Ottomans won and that the city fell; skirmishes around Palamidi where is Palamidi? Why is it important? In general, do not forget that the average reader of the English WP has no clue about the context or geography of these events, and you need to be a) precise in your formulations (e.g. Missolonghi's fate is known to you and me, but not the average English-speaker) and b) provide small descriptive summaries of the places and terms you use, or some helpful hints such as relative geographic positions. Similarly, explain briefly what the kodjabashis are (something like "notables" would suffice).
 Done
  • of the Russo-Turkish War there were several Russo-Turkish Wars by then. Clarify which one you mean.
 Done
  • took a number of fighters from Missolonghi Explain that these were those who had fled the city's fall
 Done
  • Be consistent and use either 'the Peloponnese' or 'the Morea' throughout. And the adjectives are 'Peloponnesian' and 'Moreote' respectively.
 Done
  • 3,000 man army had begun its descent towards Amfissa hyphen between the number and the noun; from where had Mustafa Bey set out? what were his orders/intentions? Any info on the composition of his army?
 Done
  • the local igumen igumen is appropriate for a Russian/Slavic monastery. Use the Greek term hegumenos, in italics as it is not a common English term, and make clear that it is related to the monastery (e.g. "the monastery's hegumenos"); otherwise replace the term with abbot.
 Done
  • oblivious of the -> oblivious to the
 Done
  • his aide Kehagias as you say, it is a title, specifically, that of
    kehaya
    )". This makes the footnote redundant, and you can simply refer to him thereafter as "the kehaya" in the article.
 Done
  • While Mustafa Bey and his aide Kehagias [Note 1] discussed their future plans while dining too many whiles in a row
 Done
  • deciding to dispatch one of them -> deciding to dispatch one of their number
 Done
  • Panfoutios Charitos "Pafnoutios" I think
 Done
  • A young monk named Panfoutios Charitos managed to bypass the Turkish sentries twice, speaking with Karaiskakis and returning to his bed before the Turks recounted the number of the monks present this reads as a sequential story, hence the monk first bypassed the sentries, then talked to Karaiskakis, and then returned to his cell. What you mean is, I guess, actually more "A young monk named Panfoutios Charitos managed to evade the Turkish sentries, inform Karaiskakis, and, again evading the Turkish guards, return to his bed before the Turks recounted the number of the monks present in the next morning".
 Done
  • "Hajipetros" is a weird transliteration; we already have an article on Christodoulos Hatzipetros, so link to him and standardize the name to "Hatzipetros".
 Done
  • Karaiskakis immediately ordered can you mention here the strength of Karaiskakis' force?
The size of his force is mentioned immediately following this sentence.
  • emerged from Mount Parnassus you cannot emerge from a mountain; do you mean "emerged from the passes of Mount Parnassus"? If you know the name of the pass, add it.
 Done
  • when Albanian soldiers make clear that these were in Turkish employ
 Done
  • they now fled in panic in fear of future reprisals did they really flee in fear of reprisals, or because there was a battle suddenly erupting amidst their own homes?
That's what the source states.
  • rebels from the surrounding areas gathered west of the village add an "and" before, and a comma after this
 Done
  • 500 infantrymen as far as I can tell, the entire Turkish force was on foot, or not? So remove "infantrymen" and replace with "men"
Not all of them were on foot I expanded on the force's composition.
  • occupied a hill overlooking the village any idea of the location (north, south, etc.) of the hill? And what happened to the Turks inside the village? Since they are mentioned later on, perhaps clarify that, because The rest of the Turkish army implies everyone but the 500-strong detachment.
None of the sources mention the location of the hill, just that there was a sheep shed on there that the Turks fortified. Addressed the second part.
  • Maura Litharia change to "Mavra Litharia" (phonetic), and clarify where that was, or rather, which of the converging Greek forces you mean here.
 Done
  • Turks continued to funnel fresh troops The Turks
 Done
  • repelled an attack the attack (if it was from the hillock, state it)
 Done
  • reaching the Agios Georgios church where, if I understand correctly, he joined up with the men he had sent earlier? At any rate, it is best if you make it explicit.
 Done
  • break out of the pocket. I am not sure that this was really a pocket; he was encircled, but not really cut off deep in enemy territory. I suggest replacing with "break out of the encirclement".
 Done
  • Change Aga to Agha, which is the common English form of the title. I would also suggest adding Abdullah Agha to the infobox
 Done
  • Turkish camp was desperate comma after this
 Done
  • Mustafa Bey who had emerged from his tent to encourage his troops comma after 'Bey' and after 'troops'
 Done
  • Soldiers pressured The soldiers or His soldiers
 Done
  • abandon Livadeia and Amfissa and abandon Livadeia and Amfissa
 Done
  • Although the initial breakout was successful comma after this
 Done
  • survived the onslaught comma after this
 Done
  • in accordance to in accordance with
 Done
  • Optional, but recommended: avoid having a single multi-page reference at the end of a paragraph, instead break the text up into smaller referenced batches. Should you (or anyone else) in the future wish to work on the article, it will make things much easier to verify and/or add upon.
  • before the rise of philhellenism in Europe, very debatable; philhellenism had risen quite early, and the Great Powers were not moved by it; rather the persistence of the Greeks (and their early successes) had led to a gradual shift in position. I feel that this part is a bit weakly covered: some info on how the battle impacted the theatre of operations ought to be given, at least what Karaiskakis and the Ottomans did directly after that. The interested reader might wonder whether the Greeks exploited their victory, or why they did not, whatever the case. It is not as if nothing happened between Arachova and the signing of the Treaty of London.

Added more info on Greek and Ottoman maneuvers after the battle. Removed any references to philhellenism.

  • Standardize ISBN formats (hyphens or no hyphens), add oclc codes for the works that have no ISBN. Also, Fotakos' work is definitely not of 2003, add the original publication year ('origyear=' parameter). If I am not mistaken, the same applies for Kokkinos' work as well. Also link the authors, Kokkinos, Kordatos, Kasomoulis at least definitely have articles. GIve also the original Greek title andchapter title for Rotzokos. "Dimos Arachovas." is the Municiality of Arachova
Standardized ISBNs, added origyear, linked authors fixed Arachova and Rotzokos. The missing ISBNs and OCLCs I simply could not find.
  • If I may suggest, Zografos' depiction of the battle (Polemos ton Ellinon is Rachova.jpg) is quite dramatic, and with a suitable annotation probably helps the reader to understand the relative positions of the opponents
 Done
That's it for now, I will wait until the points above are done, do another read-through (and psobably some copyedits) and then give the final assessment. Nice work. Constantine ✍ 20:36, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Cplakidas: I tried to address the points raised according to my ability.--Catlemur (talk) 17:23, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Cplakidas: I returned the books to the library and have to deal with some issues irl so I won't have internet access starting from Tuesday. Either find someone else to finish the article or fail it.--Catlemur (talk) 13:21, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Kingsif

  • Lead good length
  • Images PD and suitable
  • Sources all good
    • One of the sources (Kordatos, Gianis (1977). Η Επανάσταση της Θεσσαλομαγνησίας του 1821 [The Revolt of 1821 in Thessalo-Magnesia] (in Greek). Athens: Epikairotita.) isn't used in the article?
 Done
    • Most sources in Greek so hard to verify, but the Jacques source (Google books) is clear of copyvio and contains info cited to it, so AGF on the rest
    • You could add Archive or Google books links where possible?
 Done
  • Infobox appears accurate
  • Appropriate use of the campaignbox
  • Could have a link to what (N.S.) refers - a calendar
 Done
  • Arachova is overlinked - should only link at the first instance in lead and body
 Done
  • I'm not sure the Treaty of London is linked in the right place - would it be more appropriate linking "a year later" instead of "assistance" - or linking the whole phrase?
 Done
  • Condensed but clear background - good
  • The 10 a.m. time could be 10:00, especially since it's both European and a battle
 Done
  • Looks good - unless there's other specialist topic terms that can be wikilinked (though nothing that looks to need it), these are my only comments
  •  On hold Kingsif (talk) 14:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Kingsif: All done.--Catlemur (talk) 15:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Historical accuracy of the Ottoman flag (The five-pointed star didn't appear until the 1840s)

I made all my changes for historical accuracy. The five-pointed-star flag was used after 1844. Read the information in Flags of the Ottoman Empire: "The five pointed star did not appear until the 1840s." (Marshall, Tim (2017-07-04). A Flag Worth Dying For: The Power and Politics of National Symbols. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-1-5011-6833-8.) The star and crescent flag was never used in the 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th centuries, and most of the 18th century. "...the flag was defined as red by decree in 1793 and an eight-pointed star was added." (Publishing, D. K. (2009-01-06). Complete Flags of the World. Penguin. ISBN 978-0-7566-5486-3. Marshall, Tim (2017-07-04). A Flag Worth Dying For: The Power and Politics of National Symbols. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-1-5011-6833-8.) Also about the Ottoman red flag: "According to Rıza Nur, sultan Selim I (1512-20) had a white personal flag, while the Ottoman Army flag was red (kızıl bayrak). During Süleyman I's reign (1520-66) the janissaries had a white flag while the timariot cavalry had a red flag. It was used as the Ottoman civic and merchant flag from 1793 to 1923." (Jane Hathaway (1 February 2012) A Tale of Two Factions: Myth, Memory, and Identity in Ottoman Egypt and Yemen, SUNY Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-8610-8) - Aybeg (talk) 06:57, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article uses an 8 pointed star flag, so any discussion of the five-pointed-star flag, the janissary flag etc is simply irrelevant to the topic at hand. As I mentioned on your talkpage before the Commons photo of the 8 pointed star flag uses those two cites [1][2]. Your own quote: "...the flag was defined as red by decree in 1793 and an eight-pointed star was added." confirms my point. Are you even reading what you are typing out? Please go undo all your flag related edits, before I escalate the matter to ANI.--Catlemur (talk) 12:34, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ISBN 978-0-7566-5486-3
    .
  2. ISBN 978-1-5011-6833-8
    .
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_Arachova&oldid=1212903893"