Talk:Battle of Seminara

message: Added page.  Will make a simple map over the weekend and add it.  Will do editing as well .... Larry Dunn 20:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I'm guessing (as I unfortunately don't have a copy of the book on hand) that this evaluation is from Lanning?  It would probably be best to attribute that directly in the text (e.g. "according to Lanning, the greatest captain...").  Lanning isn't really an authority on this particular period (or uncontroversial in his opinions, for that matter), and the evaluation isn't something that couldn't be open to debate; presenting it as a particular historian's judgement seems more appropriate than simply stating it as fact. Kirill Lokshin 23:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not just according to Lanning.  For instance, Tom Arnold (in a book edited by Geoffrey Parker, BTW) says he was "known as the Great Captain for his peerless martial skill."  I don't have Oman with me now, but I'd be surprised if he didn't say something quite similar.  I'll add a cite to Arnold in the footnote, and I'll check for a similar cite in Oman.Larry Dunn 15:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, ok.  I'll see if I can find something similar in Oman; I don't recall, offhand, such a statement, but it's been a while since I've read the chapters for this period.  In any case, the gist of my point (somewhat broadened to "according to many historians, the greatest captain..."?) is probably still something I'd suggest considering; absolute evaluations of best/greatest/worst/etc. usually work better as (even vague) attributions rather than statements of fact.  Kirill Lokshin 16:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I'll take  second look at the language and see if I can couch it differently.  BTW, Kirill, have you seen the wiki page called Cavalry tactics? It's in a rather sad shape.  Perhaps we can get some attention to it to whip it into shape?Larry Dunn 19:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, the central topics are generally in much poorer shape than particular events/people/etc.  It's more time-consuming to collect comprehensive sources for a broader topic, so they tend to be mostly composed of scraps of material that people have added over time. Kirill Lokshin 19:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done (the change to the reference to Corboba).  How is the article looking so far?  It's my first attmept to exhaustively cite my sources.  I will be creating maps as well -- the battle map should be fairly simple, but any suggestions on how to create the campaign map showing Calabria?Larry Dunn 16:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good so far.  Campaign maps have always been a weak point for me as well—I'm rather lacking in actual drawing ability—so the most useful suggestion I can make would be to crop out part of an existing map (such as this one) to use as a background and then draw the needed symbols over top of it. Kirill Lokshin 18:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "greatest captain"? 

message: The information box states Gonzalo de Cordoba as the allied commander, but the "Battle" section seems to attribute all the relevant decisons to Ferdinand of Naples. It seems a bit contradictory to me. Could someone clarify that? M.Campos (talk) 12:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who Commanded the Allied Side?