Talk:1655 papal conclave

Note on sourcing

I've tagged this because I don't have the time to work through it immediately, but Miranda is a self-published source, and Triple Crown is regarded by Baumgartner to be more entertainment than actual history (I don't have his book on me now, but I also think he referred to it as a polemic at one point). I'll do cleanup sometime in the coming weeks, but I thought it appropriate to tag since I didn't have the time to wade through this article. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:01, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Papal conclave, 1655/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Katolophyromai (talk · contribs) 00:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

I will go ahead and review this article, since I am still trying to help clear up the backlog and I still seem to be the only user who is reviewing articles in this category. --Katolophyromai (talk) 00:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

I do have some criticisms for this article:

1. "Innocent's only nephew was created a cardinal..." I am assuming this is Innocent X, since the lead mentions that his death resulted in the convening of the conclave, but it might be better to specify this in the passage itself.

    Done

2. "During Innocent's papacy the Peace of Westphalia..." There should be a comma after "During Innocent's papacy" because it is an introductory phrase.

    Done

3. "Innocent in return refrained from appointing cardinals outside of Italy during his reign with five of the six non-Italians he created cardinals being Crown-cardinals that he created upon the insistence of Catholic monarchs. Aside from these, the remainder of his 40 creations all came from Italy." This part is really convoluted and confusing. Also, you use the phrase "he created" twice in close proximity to each other and it sounds really redundant.

   [1] Thanks for pointing that out. See if these changes fix it.

Yes. That fixes it perfectly. The revised sentence reads much more smoothly. --Katolophyromai (talk) 19:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

1. "In mid-February Sacchetti" There should be a comma after "In mid-February" for the same reason as above.

   The version I'm seeing has this already? If I'm missing one, I'll place it, but not sure where else you are talking about.

@TonyBallioni: There is already a comma after "Sacchetti," but there should be one after "mid-February." --Katolophyromai (talk) 19:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

A yes.  Done TonyBallioni (talk) 19:47, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Other comments: The part about the younger cardinals playing practical jokes on the older ones is amusing... I never really thought of cardinals as the type to play pranks on people. I also thought the part about Olimpia Maidalchini's influence was interesting. --Katolophyromai (talk) 04:53, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Katolophyromai, see above. Think I addressed this. Yes, the early moderns were fun people. Very human. Part of the interesting things about conclaves is that you have a bunch of men living together in miserable quarters for a long period of time. Leads to interesting things like playing pranks to keep entertained. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:39, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

I am now comfortable with passing this article. Congratulations! --Katolophyromai (talk) 20:10, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): 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:
· · ·