Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Luis Daoiz de Torres

Luis Daoiz de Torres

This article has recently passed a GAN and I would like to take it further (A class and maybe to FAC). The subject is an important figure in the outbreak of the Peninsular War and is known more in Spain than the English speaking world (hence the paucity of English references here). I believe the article is comprehensive and balanced but would welcome any further input, particularly with regard to the prose, and any thoughts on whether this is good enough to take further. Many thanks - Dumelow (talk) 13:37, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hchc2009

My initial thought is on the sources. Apologies in advance if my Spanish has let me down and I've misunderstood though!

Looking through a lot them (ABC de Sevilla, ideal.es etc.), they appear to be newspaper articles on de Torres. There's nothing wrong with that, but in terms of looking of taking the article further, it might be worth trying to find additional scholarly sources. A lot of the citations are from José Manuel Navarro Domínguez's self-published website; I'm assuming that he's a historian of some sort, but if not again it might be worth finding additional sources. I'd also check how you're using the letter from John Hunter (Documento); it is a primary source, and there are dangers of falling into original research with it. Similarly Partes de Guerra, again a primary source, in this case an account of the events by Captain Pedro Velarde Santillán, would benefit from support from secondary sources. Hchc2009 (talk) 14:26, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very good points in terms of primary sources, something I had completely overlooked! I will search around for secondary sources to replace them (I have found a couple I missed when I was writing this the first time) or mention their origins. Hopefully I will be able to get around to it next weekend. As for Dominguez I searched on Google Scholar for him which showed dozens of articles on this period and he seemed reputable. Many thanks for taking a look at the article, it's been very helpful so far - Dumelow (talk) 15:13, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have reduced the amount taken from Hunter and qualified it as his opinion where it is used. I took out the "Partes de Guerra" ref as it was covered by other sources anyway. I have added a new book source (in English) and hope to find a few more articles to beef up the academic side of things - Dumelow (talk) 18:11, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dank

I've done some copyediting on the lead section. If this were American English, I'd recommend lowercasing Lieutenant and Captain; I don't know the conventions in non-AmEng. I skimmed the rest and have a few observations:

You may want to use a few more commas. For instance, in "Joaquín's grandson Martin married Francisca Torres Ponce de León, daughter of the Count of Miraflores de los Angeles, in 1766 and their son Luis was born ...", I'd recommend a comma after "1766". In "in particular saber fencing and was able to speak French,", I'd recommend a comma after "fencing".
It's best to give every instance of "being" a second look to see if you really need it; in some cases, you don't.
I'm surprised not to see a space in "No.5".
American style guides require a comma after "Cuba" in: "in Havana, Cuba in ...". I have generally seen the same in non-AmEng writing, but I can't swear that the rule is the same. - Dank (push to talk) 00:23, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the ranks (I often make that mistake), the space in the gunboat name and the comma after Cuba. I'll take a look at your other suggestions. Many thanks - Dumelow (talk) 13:41, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing, let me know on my talk page if you have questions about this article in the future. - Dank (push to talk) 14:39, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]