Talk:Priscus (magister militum)

Priscus (magister militum) has been listed as one of the Warfare 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 30, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed
March 22, 2012	WikiProject A-class review	Approved

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 13, 2010.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Byzantine general Priscus survived the violent depositions of two successive Byzantine emperors and retained high office under their successors?

Current status: Good article

Biography: Military

	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).

Military history: Biography / Balkan / European / Roman & Byzantine / Medieval

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
	Balkan military history task force (c. 500–present)
	European military history task force
	Roman and Byzantine military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Additional information:
/
	This article has passed an A-Class review.

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.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dacia (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dacia, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.DaciaWikipedia:WikiProject DaciaTemplate:WikiProject DaciaDacia articles

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.

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Tagmatarchos (talk) 07:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is much more fleshed out than the original German article. Congrats.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tagmatarchos (talk • contribs) 20:32, 30 March 2010

Per a discussion with the nominator (see the relevant talk pages), I'll be conducting a second review on this just to ensure that the article meets GA standards. Canadian Paul 15:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, here's my take on the article:

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Overall very nice. Some comments:

Under "Under Marcus" you write "Priscus not only failed to restore order, but was himself attacked and forced to flee to Constantina, while the soldiers elected the dux of Phoenice, Germanus, as their leader." Dux should be wikilinked, as the average reader is not going to know what the means.
While not strictly a GA requirement, it would be nice to see alternative text for the images per Wikipedia:Alternative text for images
Same section: "At the same time however, Priscus also reportedly quarreled with his men over the distribution of the considerable amount of booty captured. Maurice also sent orders for the army to winter north of the river, but this caused great resentment and unrest amongst the soldiers." The doubled use of "also" is a bit awkward, so I would suggest removing one... I believe that the second one is unnecessary.
Same section: "It was a remarkable act of aggressive defence, in the words of Michael Whitby, "without parallel in the sixth century" for the Danube frontier, and which essentially wan the decided the war for Byzantium." Aside from the fact that the Whitby citation should come directly after the quotation, I'm assuming that the last part "wan the decided the war" was meant to be either "won the war" or "decided the war". This needs to be fixed.
Maurice (emperor) should be linked at least once in his section, as you've done with the other two emperors
Under "Under Phocas", "At any rate" is not a very encyclopedic term and should be avoided
Like dux, being tonsured is not a conception that is likely to be understood by the average reader, myself included, so at least one Wikilink would be appropriate for this as well.
The lead should cover all major sections of the article - right now it's missing any information on the "Assessment" section.

Given the situation with this GA review, I'm going to place the article "on hold" for up to one week to allow for these changes to be made. I'm always open to discussion on any of them items, so if you think I'm wrong on something leave your thoughts here and we'll discuss. I'll be checking this page at least daily, unless something comes up, so you can be sure I'll notice any comments left here. Canadian Paul 01:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review and the valid points raised. I think I've covered them, except for the alt texts, which I'll try to do tomorrow... If anything else comes to your attention, please tell me. Regards, Constantine ✍ 14:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One small issue - what you've added to the lead refers to the reader, which should be avoided. It might be better to say "Although the surviving sources...". In any case, it's minor and, since alt text is not a GA requirement, I think we can consider this article passed as a GA and end this little review kerfuffle. So congratulations and thank you for all your hard work! Canadian Paul 04:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How he died?[edit]

Wondering if anything suspicious, as he died less than a year after being exiled to a monastery? Middle More Rider (talk) 17:02, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]