Paškal Buconjić was nominated as a Philosophy and religion good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 22, 2021). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Paškal Buconjić article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on April 2, 2022. |
Full citations are needed for "Pandžić 2001" and "Šarac 2009". – Jonesey95 ( talk) 19:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Whiteguru ( talk · contribs) 01:14, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Starts GA Review; the review will follow the same sections of the Article. --
Whiteguru (
talk)
01:14, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
When Austrian-Hungarian General Stjepan Jovanović entered Herzegovina via Vrgorac on 31 August 1878 to occupy the territory, Buconjić received him in the Humac friary and helped him to enter Ljubuški and the rest of West Herzegovina without resistance.[24] Not long after the occupation, Buconjić sent a telegram to Emperor Franz Joseph expressing his hope for the unification of Bosnia and Herzegovina with Croatia.[31][32] Buconjić was also a member of the Bosnian-Herzegovinian delegation that went to Budapest to bow down before the Emperor,[14][24] presenting him a memoranda authored by Buconjić.[24]
The remainder of this section is not about the works nor the ecclesiastical activities of this bishop and may be removed;
There is an extreme difficulty here about the history of this territory, uprisings, divisions and rulership of territories after war, and the internecine battles for control of the territory through Episcopal appointments nominated by the State and later approval by Rome. As the article is about a Bishop who became Apostolic Administrator of all Herzegovina, there is too much diversion in the article to Church and State matters. It did not help that Buconjić deliberately involved himself in such matters. The other critical issue is the Franciscan custos and the battle for control of Herzegovina by Fransciscans of the Custos of the Franciscan Custody of Herzegovina, and their shameful behaviour in actively seeking that control through retention of parishes, the erection of new parishes and seminaries, although Herzegovina was well and truly no longer a missionary nation.
This ambitious article depicts the difficult tryst between Church and State, and the Franciscan / Diocesan custody battle; the article needs to be pruned back to the episcopacy of Pascal Buconjić in the main, with needful addition of materials to explain the extension and settling of the boundaries of this Apostolic Administration. To this end, I fail this article, and leave these recommendations for the next reviewer to validate upon the next nomination. -- Whiteguru ( talk) 10:17, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
This was a very good critique of the article, and I thank you for it. I'll try to implement your suggestions and improve the article. -- Governor Sheng ( talk) 19:32, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Paškal Buconjić was nominated as a Philosophy and religion good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 22, 2021). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Paškal Buconjić article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on April 2, 2022. |
Full citations are needed for "Pandžić 2001" and "Šarac 2009". – Jonesey95 ( talk) 19:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Whiteguru ( talk · contribs) 01:14, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Starts GA Review; the review will follow the same sections of the Article. --
Whiteguru (
talk)
01:14, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
When Austrian-Hungarian General Stjepan Jovanović entered Herzegovina via Vrgorac on 31 August 1878 to occupy the territory, Buconjić received him in the Humac friary and helped him to enter Ljubuški and the rest of West Herzegovina without resistance.[24] Not long after the occupation, Buconjić sent a telegram to Emperor Franz Joseph expressing his hope for the unification of Bosnia and Herzegovina with Croatia.[31][32] Buconjić was also a member of the Bosnian-Herzegovinian delegation that went to Budapest to bow down before the Emperor,[14][24] presenting him a memoranda authored by Buconjić.[24]
The remainder of this section is not about the works nor the ecclesiastical activities of this bishop and may be removed;
There is an extreme difficulty here about the history of this territory, uprisings, divisions and rulership of territories after war, and the internecine battles for control of the territory through Episcopal appointments nominated by the State and later approval by Rome. As the article is about a Bishop who became Apostolic Administrator of all Herzegovina, there is too much diversion in the article to Church and State matters. It did not help that Buconjić deliberately involved himself in such matters. The other critical issue is the Franciscan custos and the battle for control of Herzegovina by Fransciscans of the Custos of the Franciscan Custody of Herzegovina, and their shameful behaviour in actively seeking that control through retention of parishes, the erection of new parishes and seminaries, although Herzegovina was well and truly no longer a missionary nation.
This ambitious article depicts the difficult tryst between Church and State, and the Franciscan / Diocesan custody battle; the article needs to be pruned back to the episcopacy of Pascal Buconjić in the main, with needful addition of materials to explain the extension and settling of the boundaries of this Apostolic Administration. To this end, I fail this article, and leave these recommendations for the next reviewer to validate upon the next nomination. -- Whiteguru ( talk) 10:17, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
This was a very good critique of the article, and I thank you for it. I'll try to implement your suggestions and improve the article. -- Governor Sheng ( talk) 19:32, 22 March 2021 (UTC)