Talk:1689 papal conclave

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Papal conclave, 1689/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Courcelles (talk · contribs) 17:32, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

I’ll take this one on today. Courcelles (talk) 17:32, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

• "When he created twenty-seven cardinals, including one French cardinal and eleven other non-Italians." Is that his total creation of cardinals, or was that another consistory? In either situation, when was the next consistory?
  • Fixed this a bit: I updated it to include his total creations. Baumgartner is silent as to the other consistories. I'll see if I can find in Pastor when the additional consistories were, but I suspect he likely uses consistory in the meaning of "any formal meeting of cardinals with the pope" and not in the sense currently used in standard English of "a meeting of cardinals with the pope for the creation of new cardinals." The former meaning is still used today (Benedict XVI resigned at a non-cardinal creating consistory), but the common usage has shifted to the latter meaning.TonyBallioni (talk) 19:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
    • Fixed now, see below. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:31, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
• Did Innocent die, or resign? How long after his death did this conclave begin?
  •  Done TonyBallioni (talk) 19:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
• The Habsburgs ruled which territory? Specify.
  •  Done TonyBallioni (talk) 19:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
• Only seven non-Italians, but the French had five and the Habsburgs had 7? So there were Italian cardinals aligned with "foreign" interests?
  • Yes, this was the norm at the time (for money and other reasons). Italy was never a real power player in Europe on its own, and the papacy wasn't hereditary in the normal sense of the word, so Italian cardinals would often align with various secular rulers. Even the ones who wished to elect a pope who would be a good religious leader would often do this. I'm not really sure how to better explain it in the article because the sourcing assumes a certain level of familiarity with the politics of the time. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
• "The Emperor,", worth saying "Holy Roman Emperor instead?
  •  Done TonyBallioni (talk) 19:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
• What was the threshold for election then? 2/3rds like it is now?
  •  Done TonyBallioni (talk) 19:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

That's all I've got. Courcelles (talk) 18:10, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Courcelles see above. Also worth noting is that while I went back to check the number of creations of Innocent XI, I saw that Pastor disagreed with Baumgartner as to the number of electors. They are both reliable sources (despite being from the 19th century, Pastor is still cited in academic work regarding papal elections and is considered reliable by Baumgartner in his introduction. Baumgartner at one time being president of the Catholic Historical Association, and a full professor at Virginia Tech.)

I've resolved this by using the Baumgartner figure in the prose, while making a note of the disagreement as a referenced footnote. I think that is likely the best way forward as Baumgartner is the more recent source and is a professional academic historian, but if you have a better way of dealing with it, I'm open. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

One last thing, we still have an incomplete sentence sitting there "When he created twenty-seven cardinals, including one French cardinal and eleven other non-Italians." @TonyBallioni:, I'm happy with the way of dealing with the discrepancy in the sources; well done. Courcelles (talk) 19:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Fixed: [1]. Also fixes the consistory question above (somehow I missed it the last time through.) TonyBallioni (talk) 19:31, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

After a couplte trivia tweaks of my own, this passes. Congrats. Courcelles (talk) 19:33, 15 April 2018 (UTC)