Talk:Relief of Genoa/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Hchc2009 (talk) 14:34, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Good to see a 17th century article!

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

I'll work my way through it. The text needs a little bit of attention in places.

Lead:

• Second para: you refer to the "French troops of the Duke of Savoy" - do you mean French troops, commanded by the Duke of Savoy; or French troops from Savoy? (NB: the reader won't know the relationship between Savoy and France at this time)
• "However, the Spanish fleet..." - I'd avoid starting a paragraph with an "however"
• "Returning its sovereignty to the Republic of Genoa and forcing the French to raise the siege..." - I'm not sure that the beginning of this sentence is quite right - had the French formally declared their intention to remove the sovereignty of the republic at this time?
• "hit the bank of the King of Spain"" - the italics aren't necessary for the quote
• The block quote isn't mentioned elsewhere in the main text, so shouldn't be in the lead (you could either move it down, or refer to it below)
• "Richelieu's Invasion of Genoa and the Valtelline had resulted in his humiliation by the Spaniards." "invasion" needs a lower case "i". I think you'd be better off with "resulted" rather than "had resulted".

Background:

• "In 1622 Richelieu..." You'll need to explain who Richelieu is.
• "In northern Italy, Philip IV of Spain had followed his father's efforts to defend Catholics in the valleys of Valtellina and the Protestants in Graubünden." - defended against who?
• "They claimed that due to the alliance between them..." As you're starting a new paragraph, you should expand "They..."
• "...who were attacking Genoa, by attacking Valtelline and diverting the resources of the Spanish, who were supporters of Genoa" This is a long sentence. I'd add a full stop and start a new sentence on "Who were..." (e.g. "The Duchy of Savoy were attacking Genoa...")
• "Grey Leagues" - you'll need to explain/link
• "to protect them, Richelieu had established the Governors of the Duchy of Milan. " - You probably would want to start a new sentence before "to protect" (e.g. "To protect them, Richelieu..."); its also unclear how establishing the governors would protect them.
• "deciding to make a several action." - "several action?" doesn't make much sense; how about "combined attack?"
• "the pretext that papal forced" > "papal forces"?
• "The irony of a Cardinal attacking the troops of a Pope" > I lost the thread here. Which Pope's forces were being attacked? Are these the ones in the Valtelline? Also, I'm not sure this sentence fits well with the next one (about French action)
• "An attack on Genoa would cut the southern end of the Spanish Road and knock out Spain's banker." - I don't think the article's explained that Genoa was an important source of funds for the Spanish; you'll need to expand this bit.
• "and explains French participation in the London talks with Mansfeld." > You'll need to explain what these were.
• "France also sent financial help to the Dutch Republic, and subsidised the siege of Mansfeld." You'll need to explain a little bit more about Mansfeld - who was he besieging etc.
• "Rhetians" - are these from the Rhaetian Alps?
• "Richelieu's elaborate plan..." You haven't really explained why Richelieu's plan was elaborate.
• "dévots" - you'll need to explain who or what these are
• "Don Gómez Suárez de Figueroa, 3rd Duke of Feria sent 6,000 men and Tommaso Caracciolo as Maestro de Campo in order to reinforce the city of Genoa, which continued to resist the Franco-Savoyard siege." It would be worth clarifying that these were Spanish seniors.

I'll run through the other sections later.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

• Overall sources look good, and have the standard 17th century texts I'd expect to see.
• Second paragraph (beginning "Despite these dangers..." and then "Yet even this...") - there's no source listed beyond the one for the quote in the middle.
• The references have a "Hubert Granville Revell Reade – Sidelights on the Thirty Years War", but it's not included in the bibliography.

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

5. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):

• Images checked.

b (appropriate use with suitable captions): * The Relief of Genoa section is very heavy in terms of pictures - I'd advise removing one, as they're crowding the text.

• The formatting of the Aftermath section pictures seems odd - you probably need to move them in the text a bit.
• Most of the captions end in full-stops, against the policy on captions.

2. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comment

as the nominator has failed to respond and has not edited since 1 February, suggest that you fail this nomination. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:22, 14 February 2011 (UTC)