GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Chiswick Chap ( talk · contribs) 19:03, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I'll bite the bullet (hope that's not falling on my gladius) on this one.
Chiswick Chap (
talk) 19:03, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
"States, such as Palmyra, temporarily divided the Empire in a 3rd-century crisis". Perhaps that could be clearer (how did small city-states divide a huge empire?).
" in his classical epic poem the Aeneid. In the Aeneid, ..." Maybe avoid the repetition.
"Concrete made possible the paved, durable Roman roads": so they were constructed with concrete? Needs a ref, and I think some explanation. Roman_roads#Construction_and_engineering says nothing about the use of cement or concrete?
In fact the whole Ancient_Rome#Technology section needs more referencing.
I have marked up a few sections, e.g. Punic Wars, Government, Society, Economy, Games and recreation, that need more references.
There is scope for an image in Punic Wars - you could have Hannibal and Scipio side-by-side, perhaps.
"Quaestors were made automatic members of the Senate". Perhaps they were automatically made members.
"Portrait sculpture during the period" - which?
Adjectives are somewhat astray in some places, e.g. "the famous Hadrian's Wall", the "famously decisive Battle of Zama" - who says it's famous?
Military: perhaps add an image of a Roman ship to balance the infantry soldier.
Cuisine section - needs citations, and some expansion. At the moment it consists of WP:OR-ish generalities. I suggest you briefly mention what was eaten at a Cena and say a little about Food and dining in the Roman Empire. There is scope for an image (from a mosaic or fresco) here. You might briefly describe one or two characteristic ingredients such as garum, and the empire-wide trade in olive oil.
Scholarly studies: seems to fade out a century ago? I suggest you put the Russian title into a reference instead of the main text. But mainly it needs to be merged with Historiography, doesn't it? If there's a difference, do explain it, as it isn't clear. And move the merged section to the end of the article.
Images: all from Commons except the Valentinian III family and Trajan's Market (which ought to be moved there).
The image of the Forum should say it is a (CGI) model or reconstruction.
Image captions: there are many people here, over a very long time period, so dates might be a help in all the captions.
The maps are noticeably in very different (ok, random) styles, which is quite distracting to the reader. It would be desirable (so, not a GA requirement) to harmonise these.
References are formatted very diversely, from naked links to full citations. This is not a GA issue but needs to be tidied up radically for FA.
There are some footnotes mixed in with the references, e.g. #3, #226. It would be best to separate these out as "Notes" and to leave the refs as "References". This is not a GA requirement.