Wikipedia:Peer review/Gaius Caesar/archive1

Gaius Caesar

I'm looking to have the article promoted to Good Article status, and am looking for areas in need of improvement. I've been working on the articles of lesser-known members of the Julio-Claudian dynasty and Gaius played an important role in the early succession scheme of Augustus. I will be able to respond any day but Fridays. SpartaN (talk) 21:16, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I am having a look at it. It looks great to me, and will point out any issues. Also, I would make straight forward changes as I go, and please feel free to revert any of my edits. Adityavagarwal (talk) 09:55, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I will be able to respond tomorrow morning before work. SpartaN (talk) 22:51, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Please take your time. I would be completing this review by today, and then jump in myself to correct the issues! Adityavagarwal (talk) 01:44, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

• "Juba II, former king of Maurentania..." is it "Maurentania" instead?

You spelled both the same

Oops. I mean Mauretania. Adityavagarwal (talk) 19:11, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

• Link Parthia.

done

In most cases, a link is to be made both, in lead, and in the body of the article. Duplicates do not count for the lead. I linked it in the body too, now.

• Expand the lead.

will do shortly

working on it now

done

• "... died at Massalia in August" I think Massalia is in France; I was unable to find the place named "August". Do you mean that he died in the month of August? If so, that would need some rephrasing, as now I suspect that you mean he died in the month of August, instead of Massalia in August as a place.

"in the month of August"

• "Though he was married to his second cousin Livilla, the marriage had no issue." Why would it have issues?

it means they had no children. Rephrased to "no children came from the marriage".

You mean, he and Livilla din't have any children?

yes. Actually "the marriage had no issue" has never been a problem before. I can change "no children came from the marriage" to an even more plain "they did not have children". I really can't make it any more blunt than this.

It is better.

• Link Rome.

done

• Link Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa.

done

• Link Julia the Elder.

done

• Link Augustus again after lead. (Duplicate links do not count in lead)

done

• Link Tiberius.

done

• "and named the two boys his heirs" He named them his heirs? Needs rephrasing.

"and he named both Gaius and Lucius his heirs"

• "... mostly by himself" When you already mentioned Augustus earlier in the sentence, you do not need to mention this part of the sentence.

it's a mention of the abnormal practice in an emperor taking a direct role in the education of children when ordinarily this would have been done almost exclusively by tutors

• Link Pannonia.

done

• "... Gaius took part with his brothers Lucius and Agrippa in the" You mean his brother Lucius and his father Agrippa? If so, you could instead say "with Lucius and Agrippa".

The phrase referring to Lucius and Agrippa referred to his brothers Lucius Caesar and Agrippa Postumus. I should have used the more common Postumus to distinguish Gaius' brother from his father.

• Link Drusus.

already done (only one Drusus)

• Link Rhine earlier.

done

• "honors" needs to be consistent with UK or US english. At some places, "honours" is mentioned.

done ('Merica!)

• "that there may have been foul play involved" too wordy.

"foul play may have been involved"

• "Gaius was played by Earl Rhodes in the 1976 TV series I, Claudius." This needs citation.

More in a while. Adityavagarwal (talk) 10:54, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

• Link pontifex.

done

• Link Livia.

done

• Link Judaea.

already linked ("Herodian kingdom" is Judaea in that time.)

• Link Palestine, as it is not covered under WP:Overlinking, so it should be fine.

done

• Link Sabinus.

there is no article for him, unfortunately

Is it Masurius Sabinus?

No, because Masurius Sabinus was active much later in the reigns of Tiberius and Nero, and there is no mention for him being a legate in Judaea or Palestine.

• Could the name of the king be mentioned in "...and expelled the king installed by Rome"? (if possible)

done

• Link Herod the Great.

already linked as "Herod" (he was the Herod)

• "...deploy an Army" in this, why is A in Army capital? Is it a specific army that is being tried to named here?

fixed

• Link Euphrates.

done

• "... politics and removed himself to Rhodes" does it mean he went to Rhodes?

yes. reworded to "... politics and retired to Rhodes"

• Link Suetonius.

done

• "... with the decision of 6 BC" Instead, it would be better if the decision of consulship in his twelfth year could be mentioned again. This is because, as it is now, it sounds more like some "named" XYZ decision of 6 BC.

changed to "... in accordance with the decision of 6 BC which named him consul designate."

• Link Antioch.

done

• Link South Arabia.

done

• "... little Lycian town " if you would be able to find the name of the town, it would be better.

I'm unable to find an exact town. I feel like "little Lycian town" is as accurate as it gets.

• Link John Grainger.

done

This should be it. This article is historically important, and should get to a GA. In fact, I would recommend a copy-edit from the Guild of Copy Editors, and go for an FA afterwards! The peer review also was directed towards an FA. Amazing one, buddy! Adityavagarwal (talk) 18:56, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your support and I will get to making these changes and the couple I skipped after work today. It's been a busy week. SpartaN (talk) 17:09, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Please take your time. I would try fixing the issues myself by then, if I don't fall asleep.

I hope I've fulfilled all the suggestions and I think the article looks much better now. I will take it to the Guild of Copy Editors next and then to GAN and FA. I appreciate you taking the time to read the article and the ideas to improve it. SpartaN (talk) 19:11, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

One last point, if "Gaius was played by Earl Rhodes in the 1976 TV series I, Claudius." this could be cited, it would make this article awesome citation wise too. Adityavagarwal (talk) 19:30, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Whoops! It's been cited now. SpartaN (talk) 19:44, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Done. It was rather quick; I din't expected you to amend the issues so fast! All good now. It passes the Peer Review. Thank you very much for addressing the issues, and I hope you have a great day. Also, I wish you good luck for your GAN or/and FAC nominations!Adityavagarwal (talk) 19:48, 5 August 2017 (UTC)