User talk:A.Cython

Moved here as the conversation was getting well off the original topic.

That's awesome! Well, not sure which one is closer to ACR so feel free pick the one(s) you feel look best out of the following four. Any advice you give will most helpful in improving all the other articles.

• Siege of Ariminum (538) (1375 words) is currently GA and it has some interest to the reader as it has unique story: beating a numerically superior besieging force without a fight. Though it is the smaller article of the four.
• Siege of Ravenna (539–540) (2042 words) currently GAN, it also has a unique plot twist: Belisarius refused the purple as a way to capture the city without a fight. At some point I want to write a "Scholarly assessment" section and summarize some comments by historians (unbroken loyalty to the emperor but disobeyed orders and also political consequences), so you may ignore this one...
• Siege of Auximus (2382 words) GA status since yesterday. Not the highlight of the Gothic War but it has some interesting aspects beyond the battle engagement itself.
• Battle of Taginae (2858 words) overhauled last week (probably the longest article of the child articles so far, but it might have some wriggles that need to be ironed first), I am planning to submit for B-class later today and then GAN.

Again, many thanks in advance for your time in helping. I am looking forward to your the comments at my talk page or at the article's talk page. A.Cython(talk) 18:33, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

• Let's go with Ariminum. It has already had eyes on it at GAN, and once done will let us roll straight into Ravenna as a follow up article. How would you like to handle things? A full collaboration? Me providing a rough idea of what needs improving or adding and leaving you to it? Something else? Gog the Mild (talk) 19:00, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

  Ariminum it is then. Never done collaboration before, so you need to tell me how this done in terms of sharing credit, which I am happy to do so. As for contributions, for me the priority is to elevate the articles and learning how to improve an article beyond GA. So perhaps telling what changes need to be done (and I will do them) would be the most instructive. However, if you feel that directly making the changes is the most efficient way, then do so and I will figure out the rationale behind the changes. A.Cython(talk) 19:35, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Let's tentatively make it a collaboration, subject to revision once we find out how things actually work between us. Credit - we both get full credit for any collaborations we take to GAN, ACR or FAC. Eg, 4 of my 77 FACs to date were collaborations, but I still have 77 FAs to my credit.

• Task 1. I feel that the article should start with a proper "Background" section, setting the scene and briefly explaining the historical, er, background. Maybe one paragraph on: Italy was once Roman, Rome survived in the east, ambitious young emperor. Then one on conquests of Tunisia and Sicily, capture of Naples and Rome, siege of Rome, other simultaneous operations. The first of these in particular needs to be good, as it will get reused in all of the subsequent articles. Write this up in a sandbox or create a draft. No, let's make it one of mine as I have page mover rights - User:Gog the Mild/Siege of Ariminum (538). The fun part: don't use any primary sources; and use 100-year-old-plus sources - yes, Bury - as little as you possibly can, ideally none at all. You ok to have a go at that? Or I could do it - I have several modern general histories of the period which would be up to it. To get an idea of what I have in mind, have a look at the Background sections of the FAs Battle of Morlaix and Battle of Winwick.
• We ought to say something about the primary sources. See the "Primary sources" section of Punic Wars for an idea of what I am thinking of - although we can be quite a bit briefer if we want. Again, do you fancy doing this?
• I note that you have your preferences set to not receive emails. That is fine, but we would be able to exchange sources if you were to toggle it.

Any questions? Gog the Mild (talk) 21:27, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Let's proceed with a collaboration and many thanks for giving examples to look at. I will try to write a draft for these new sections according to your advise, it will take few days maybe a week to prepare something. Then you can rewrite/improve as you see fit.

• For the background section, an overarching historical narrative makes sense, and it won't be difficult to rely exclusively on modern secondary sources since most of them do this; the challenge was to find the details of the battle engagements as these are typically skipped.
• Primary sources, well as far as I know, there is only one by Procopius. Overall, he is considered reliable for narrating the sequence of the events though he has been accused to be favoring Belisarius over other commanders, placing emphasis on mounted combat over the role of infantry, possibly inflating some (army size or casualties) numbers for propaganda purposes, and of course being on the side of Byzantines. So yes, I see why we need to talk about the primary sources. A.Cython(talk) 22:05, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

• You may find this interesting as background for the Primary sourcess ection. It focuses on the east, not Italy, but you should be able to mine some helpful quotes, such as "This case again illustrates how Procopius’ interpretations of his material should be treated with caution." "Scholars rightly regard Procopius’ account of military matters as remarkably reliable." "there is Procopius’ firm belief in the “idea of Rome,” which makes him presume basic Roman superiority to all barbarians". Gog the Mild (talk) 20:42, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you, i will read it tonight. I am currently reading two other sources that focus exclusively on Procopius. I will post them once i am back to my desktop (current reply by mobile) later today and hopefully provide a summary as the basis for an expansion. A.Cython(talk) 20:50, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

  @Gog the Mild These are the two sources that I am reading:

  1. Evans, J.A.S., 1970. Justinian and the historian Procopius. Greece & Rome, 17(2), pp. 218-223
  2. Cameron, A., 2006. Procopius and the sixth century. Routledge.

  I just added them to the temporary page as well. I will add a summary later today (I hope). A.Cython(talk) 22:34, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

• (talk page watcher) Hi A.Cython, I don't think we've ever crossed paths, but I just wanted to warn you about collaborating with this guy Gog the Mild ...
  ...It'll be an absolute pleasure  :) and that's speaking from experience. I look forward to seeing the fruits. —Fortuna, imperatrix 19:54, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

  I will take any help possible to get there and from what I gather Gog the mild has an excellent reputation. I am slightly slow in February as my priority is to get as many GARs as possible to have a healthy ratio while the GANs (~10 are on Gothic war) are waiting to a reviewer. The GA backlog drive certainly helps with motivation. After this I will resume in improving these articles so hopefully soon you will see fruits. 😄 A.Cython(talk) 20:05, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild Apologies for the disappearance of about a month but I was busy with GARs as part of the GA backlog drive. Now that this has ended I am back into writing mode. I have updated background section for Gothic War. Let me know your thoughts, so that I made any more fixes before adding it to the Siege of Ariminum. A.Cython(talk) 05:20, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Siege of Naples (536) has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 22:41, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

thank you kindly for your work reviewing seven samurai! i'll try and incorporate your suggestions before bringing it to fac. just also wanted to say thanks for your strong commitment to the ga review drive this month!! best wishes.--Plifal (talk) 02:35, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

@Plifal No, no, thank you for putting the effort in writing high quality articles, it makes the life of the reviewer so much easier. As for me, I have 15 pending GANs (+5 GA) and I want to have a 2:1... so I am far behind, the drive helps to get there. A.Cython(talk) 02:50, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Siege of Constantinople (1235–1236) has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jon698 -- Jon698 (talk) 07:05, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

On 17 February 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Siege of Ariminum (538), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Belisarius broke the Siege of Ariminum to save a general who had refused his orders? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Ariminum (538). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Siege of Ariminum (538)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 00:03, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

On 18 February 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Siege of Milan (538–539), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the devastation inflicted by the Ostrogoths after the siege of Milan in 538–539 is considered to have surpassed even the worst atrocities committed by Attila in his campaigns? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Milan (538–539). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Siege of Milan (538–539)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 8,063 views (671.9 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of February 2026 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:29, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

HurricaneZeta^C 12:03, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi A.Cython, first of all, thanks for taking this on. I am looking into your recommendations, and did follow most of them. There are some issues left that I will look into later, but you could look at this first batch if you have the time. Thanks again for this thorough review. - DonCalo (talk) 15:16, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

I will later today. Thank for making changes. A.Cython(talk) 15:18, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

@DonCalo Overall the changes are in the right direction. Once you address the remaining minor pending issues, ping me so that I read it one more time and conclude the review. A.Cython(talk) 22:08, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

@User:A.Cython Hi, I rewrote the lead along the lines you suggested. I also added a legacy section at the end of the article and summarized it in the lead. I think it is ready now for a final assessment. - DonCalo (talk) 18:43, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I will read it one more time tonight and conclude the review assuming there are no pending issues. A.Cython(talk) 18:48, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your review and filtering out the errors, including the embarrassing wrong birth date. Like I said that was from the Italian Wikipedia and even Wikidata. Your usefull suggestions really improved the article and I think our exchange was pleasant and respectful. So, thanks again and have a nice day. - DonCalo (talk) 12:59, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

The pleasure was mine as I learned about modern Italian history. Bring more articles to WP! 😄 A.Cython(talk) 14:05, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

On 22 February 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Siege of Auximus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Siege of Auximus, a bodyguard saved Belisarius's life by blocking an arrow with his hand? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Auximus. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Siege of Auximus), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

—TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 12:02, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Siege of Verona is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 17:34, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Siege of Verona has been placed on hold, as the article needs some changes. See the review page for more information. If these are addressed within 7 days, the nomination will pass; otherwise, it may fail. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 08:33, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

On 27 February 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Siege of Naples (536), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Siege of Naples, local Jews mounted the strongest resistance against the attacking Byzantines in 536? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Naples (536). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Siege of Naples (536)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 00:03, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Siege of Verona has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 10:04, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

On 10 March 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Siege of Constantinople (1235–1236), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tsar Asen interpreted the sudden death of his wife and child as divine punishment for breaking his alliance during the 1235–1236 siege of Constantinople? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Constantinople (1235–1236). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Siege of Constantinople (1235–1236)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

HurricaneZeta^C 00:03, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Siege of Ravenna (539–540) is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 10:04, 10 March 2026 (UTC)