Talk:Boukephala and Nikaia/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 13:58, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:58, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Images are suitably licensed. Earwig finds no issues; sources are reliable.

• The map gives alternative spellings; if these can be sourced, should we mention them in the article?

• Greek transliterations are variable, depending on whether you want to be more classical (the current names) or more English (as on the map). I don't think I can find the sources for that.

• "Perdiccas, another of the future Diadochi": we haven't introduced the term "Diadochi" to this point; do we really need it? Might be simpler just to say "another of Alexander's generals".

• Simplified

• "Boukephala and Nikaia were also exceptional among the many cities founded by Alexander to not be at or near an existing fortress or provincial capital." I don't think this syntax works. How about "Boukephala and Nikaia were also exceptional among the many cities founded by Alexander in not being at or near an existing fortress or provincial capital", or "Boukephala and Nikaia were not at or near an existing fortress or provincial capital, making them exceptional among the many cities founded by Alexander".

• Done.

• "very much not definite": suggest "quite unclear".

• Altered.

• "it is actually possible that Arrian himself": I don't think you need "actually".

• Done

• "Boukephala appears to have survived for some centuries; it was probably under the rule of the Mauryan Empire, while the later presence of the Indo-Greek kingdom in the area would have helped it to survive": can we add approximate dates or date ranges to this? That would help a reader unfamiliar with the history.

• Done

• "Boukephala appears in many other Greco-Roman texts, including Pliny the Elder, who notes that the city was the chief of three controlled by the Asini tribe, Ptolemy, and various recensions of the Alexander Romance." I initially parsed this as meaning that Ptolemy, along with the Asini tribe, controlled the city. I think just moving Pliny to the end of the list of texts, taking its subclause with it, would resolve this.

• Done.

• In a couple of cases where you cite primary sources you cite a modern source alongside it, which I think is a good idea as it indicates this is not original research in primary sources. There are a couple of cases where you don't do this. I don't see any of them as controversial, and so long as conclusions drawn from these sources are cited to modern historians I think it's OK, but if it's easy to associate a modern source with each primary citation I would do so.

• Those in the paragraph beginning "there is also confusion..." are all ultimately sourced to the Cohen citation. I have duplicated this for each primary citation. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:21, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

All very minor. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:18, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Spotchecks -- I don't have access to these sources, so can you quote the supporting text?

• FN 7 cites "Unused to the South Asian monsoon, the cities' builders failed to provide enough strengthening against the rains: when Alexander returned a few months later, after his troops had mutinied at the Hyphasis (modern-day Beas River), he used his army to repair damage caused by the monsoon."

• "It seems that the their construction was not sufficiently substantial to provide protection against the coming rains, for both cities needed repairs after the monsoons a few months later. In the meantime [Alexander] had advanced...until the mutiny at the Hyphasis forced him to retrace his steps...It will be remembered that Arrian tells us that at the very outset both cities suffered from the rains during the very brief period in which Alexander had advanced further east and returned to the Jhelum."

• FN 14 cites "Plutarch however specifically mentions that Bucephalus died "not at once, but some time afterwards", either from wounds or simple old age."

• Plutarch: "After the battle with Porus, too, Bucephalas died, — not at once, but some time afterwards, — as most writers say, from wounds for which he was under treatment, but according to Onesicritus, from old age, having become quite worn out;​100 for he was thirty years old when he died."
• Cohen: " Interestingly, Plutarch specifically says (Alex. 61.1) that Boukephalos died “not at once [i.e., after the battle] but some time afterwards”

• FN 26 cites "Following this theory, a monument to the life of Alexander was built between 1998 and 2011 near the town; funded by the Government of Pakistan, the Greek embassy in Islamabad, and by private donations, the building had become dilapidated by 2023."

• "A big white Alexander monument, funded by donors and the embassies of Greece and Pakistan, [installed] near the little town of Jalalpur... Built from 1998 to 2011, the “centre” is now is padlocked and festooned in barbed wire. The white paint is peeling off the big Greek pillars on the platform and the study rooms and lone computer have gone mouldy."

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:18, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

• Responded to everything Mike Christie. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:21, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Fixes are all good; passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:07, 30 April 2023 (UTC)