Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Siege of Lilybaeum (250–241 BC)/archive1

Nominator(s): Gog the Mild (talk) 10:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For those not yet surfeited on First Punic War articles, I offer this relatively short article on Rome's nine-year-long attempt to end the war by capturing one of Carthage's last two strongholds on Sicily. How did it go? Read and find out. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review from Harrias

It is unclear from the Background section; did the Carthaginians hold Sicily prior to the First Punic War?
"The remaining Roman consul, Lucius Caecilius Metellus sent out.." Add a comma after Metellus.
Move the Lilybaeum link to the first use.
"..under the command of Himilco." Who? Everyone else has been introduced with some sort of title or position.
"..as being 20-metre -deep (60 ft) and 30-metre -wide (90 ft)." Not quite right, should just be "20 metres (60 ft) deep and 30 metres (90 ft) wide."
The caption states "The south-east corner where the Romans started their assault is bottom right." but the article says "assaulted the south-west corner of the fortifications."
"The Romans also lost men to exposure.." Exposure to what?
"..derogatively as "mercenaries"[43] Their loyalty.." Could do with a full stop.
"..intending to betraying the city." -ing.
Link "sally" to Sortie (siege warfare).
"The Roman assault continued. The Romans broke down part of the wall using catapults. The defenders built an inner wall." Not keen on the bullet point-like sentences here.
"By means which are unclear in the sources, possibly by tempting them further into the city, Himilco destroyed them and recaptured the wall." The phrasing of this suggests OR or EDITORIALIZING; try to rephrase it to make clear that this is what the secondary sources say, not Wikipedia.
The article Battle of the Aegates says "The Romans modelled the ships of their new fleet on the vessel captured from Hannibal the Rhodian.", but this article is cagier: "The Romans modelled the ships of their new fleet on a captured blockade runner with especially good qualities, possibly Hannibal the Rhodian's." Be consistent.
It goes against normal policy, but I would suggest linking Battle of the Aegates again in Naval clashes, given that it is a long time since the first mention, which is also in a section that many might skip. Usability over policy!
Date the Battle of the Aegates.
"The question of which state was to control the western Mediterranean remained open.." Sounds a bit OPED-y. Also, try to avoid the single-sentence paragraph.

That's all from me at the moment. Another nice article. Harrias ^talk 12:45, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from T8612

I would make it clearer in the lede that the Romans took the city after the Treaty of Lutatius was signed, but that they were unable to take it through a military assault. Same with the "result" in the infobox (not sure if it's possible to summarise this in the infobox, but I wouldn't be against saying "stalemate/Carthage evacuates the city in 241").
Perhaps you can shorten the Roman names in the infobox to avoid them spanning over two lines: Gaius Atilius Regulus Serranus-->C. Atilius Regulus Serranus; Lucius Manlius Vulso Longus-->L. Manlius Vulso Longus; Publius Claudius Pulcher-->P. Claudius Pulcher; Gaius Lutatius Catulus-->C. Lutatius Catulus.
In the Primary sources section, perhaps you can mention Philinus of Agrigentum among the pro-Carthaginian sources Polybius used.
Can you move up the map "Territory controlled by Rome and Carthage at the start of the First Punic War" so it doesn't push the "Background" title in the middle of the screen?
In the Siege section, I would say "Lilybaeum and Drepana (modern Marsala and Trapani)" to match ancient and modern names (you have reversed the order).
I would say in this section that Pyrrhus had also failed there in 287 BC.
I think the term Fabian Strategy is anachronistic here, as it was designed in the Second Punic War. Moreover, the Fabian Strategy was a war of attrition, while Hamilcar waged a guerrilla. I would use guerrilla instead; although the term was coined later too, it is more accurate here.
I would move up the picture of the denarius to remove the large white space above the Aftermath section.
In the Aftermath, I would say that Carthage tried to recapture Lilybaeum at the beginning of the Second Punic War (in 218). Source: John Briscoe, "the Second Punic War", in J. A. Crook, F. W. Walbank, M. W. Frederiksen, R. M. Ogilvie (editors), The Cambridge Ancient History, vol. VIII, Rome and the Mediterranean to 133 B.C., Cambridge University Press, 1989, p. 61. T8612 (talk) 13:07, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]