Talk:Palladius (Caesar)

Palladius (Caesar) has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 26, 2018. (Reviewed version).

Biography: Military / Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Greece: Byzantine Low‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Byzantine world task force.

Military history: Biography / Roman & Byzantine / Classical

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	Roman and Byzantine military history task force
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

Roman and Byzantine emperors Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of the Roman and Byzantine Emperors WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Roman and Byzantine emperors. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Roman and Byzantine emperorsWikipedia:WikiProject Roman and Byzantine emperorsTemplate:WikiProject Roman and Byzantine emperorsRoman and Byzantine emperors articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Palladius (Caesar)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The lazy mouse (talk · contribs) 14:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I can pass this article in good faith as long as the first thing I notice is this large font typo right at the top: "Reign 17 March – 31 May AD."

Done

There should be an explanation of what the title caesar meant. The subject's father was emperor and as caesar Palladius was heir to the throne. In most cases, you can use English and call him "heir to the throne" instead of caesar. Also, there is no reason to italicize the word caesar.

It is standard practice to use caesar, and to italicize it. In this instance in history, caesar was equivalent to heir, yes, but it varied heavily through history. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 14:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Palladus was caesar when the Vandals sacked Rome. This fact should be mentioned in the opening of the article. After all, this is the incident that gave us the word "vandalism." Currently, the opening focuses on the exact length of his tenure, which strikes me as a detail.

Done

You should check out Thomas Hodkin's Italy and Her Invaders (1892), which is the classic account of this corner of history. Hodkin has several details that can be added to the article. In his telling, Eudoxia "was one of the loveliest women of her time," a Roman Helen who launched a thousand Vandal ships. Even if this is a romantic conceit, it should be mentioned.

If it is romantic conceit, it should not be added, per Wikipedia's policy. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 14:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written. Fail. Notable typos and fails to explain the reason for the subject notability.
All fixed, subject notability is obviously given by WP:POLITICIAN. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 14:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
2. Verifiable with no original research: pass
3. Broad in its coverage: fails. focus on detail and misses the larger picture
What larger picture do you desire here? Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 14:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
4. Neutral Fail. Doesn't give the tradition view mentioned above.
Neutrality has nothing to do with traditional views. It has to do with bias. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 14:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
5. Stable pass. It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.[8]
6. Illustrated Fail. No illustrations.
@The lazy mouse: please note that the criteria contains the "if possible". There are no images which can be added that are directly related, as the subject died before the invasion itself, so an image of such cannot be added. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 14:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for once again addressing my concerns. (Really, I am not stalking you. We just both seem to have an interest in ancient Rome.) I think we are ready to pass this article now.

1. Well written. pass
2. Verifiable with no original research. Pass
3. Broad in its coverage. Pass
4. Neutral. Pass
5. Stable. Pass.
6. Illustrated. Pass. The lazy mouse (talk) 15:26, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]