Talk:Battle of Alba Longa

This article was nominated for deletion on 14 March 2024. The result of the discussion was Mixed outcome.

Military history: National / African / European / Italian / Classical / Medieval C‑class

This redirect 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

C

This redirect does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force
	African military history task force
	European military history task force
	Italian military history task force (c. 500–present)
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Missing Bibliography[edit]

Hello, @TableSalt43. You are missing multiple works for your sfn/harv sources. The following works are missing and should be added to a bibliography/work cited area of the article for further expansion of knowledge for future readers: "Cornell 1995", "Lomas 2018", "Miles 1995", "Dion Hal Ant Rom", "Livy", and "Forsythe 2005". When you add them, make sure to use the right citation templates like cite book, cite journal, etc. Thank you, Thecowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LAYOUT, WP:CFORK, WP:COPYVIO[edit]

This was brought to my attention by a post on WT:CGR. Moreover, until a recent attribution this article also violates my copyright since it failed to attribute work that I had done on Founding of Rome. There is a WP:LAYOUT issue. Second, this is a WP:CFORK. Nor is this topic notable: there is no battle to be described beyond a cursory statement in the ancient sources, making the vast majority of this article superfluous. It should be reduced to redirect as similar WP:CFORKs have been in other cases. Ifly6 (talk) 16:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond the unattributed copying and content forking, the content that was forked is of low quaity. The framing of the story of Aeneas and his successors as literally true mixes fact with fiction or, if there are some people who believe the mythology as literal history, WP:UNDUE. It should be phrased in much the same way the myths at Founding of Rome and Overthrow of the Roman monarchy are phrased. While the existence of Alba isn't really doubted, there is no evidence of any kind of Alban hegemony or of these Latin colonies. Repeating mythology as facts in Wikivoice should not be acceptable. Ifly6 (talk) 16:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern[edit]

See Talk:Battle of Antemnae#There is almost nothing here about the battle itself. Pinging @Ifly6:. --Викидим (talk) 19:48, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is my belief that these "battle" "articles" which are just a few sentences should all be turned back into redirects. They do nothing but repeat, many times in a WP:COPYVIO manner, information already present. This is a classic WP:CFORK; we already have precedent for redirecting these articles (eg Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octavian's march on Rome). Ifly6 (talk) 21:52, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]